Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Strategy Design for Flourishing: A Robust Method

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Rethinking Strategic Management

Part of the book series: CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance ((CSEG))

Abstract

The Flourishing Enterprise Strategy Design Method is a robust procedure that helps leaders craft effective enterprise strategies in our increasingly volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous world. Informed by the latest science and practice, it enables leaders to create strategic paths for enterprises and their stakeholders to improve their performance financially, socially and environmentally. The method integrates business design and strategy techniques with vital science-based principles for flourishing. From an overall process perspective, the method employs the backcasting approach. From a strategic planning standpoint, the method hosts a strategic conversation about the stakeholder’s definition of success for the enterprise considering science-based principles. This occurs during an iterative co-creative systemic-design process focused on business modelling. Business modelling is enabled by the Flourishing Business Canvas: an innovative visual design tool aligned with the science-based principles. A case study of a medium-sized manufacturing business illustrates how the method is applied. Finally, the case is made for swift adoption of these innovative strategy methods by enterprises in all sectors and sizes to enable their powerful response to current climate challenges, to the UN Sustainable Development Goals, and to go beyond to ensure the conditions for all life to flourish are re-enabled for future generations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    The method as described here is intended for use by established organizations. For the application of the method to ideation, early and later stage start-up, applying lean start-up and customer development techniques to iteratively search for a viable business model for flourishing, see the Lean for Flourishing Startups Method www.Lean4Flourishing.biz (Hogeboom, 2015, 2019).

  2. 2.

    The original quote is “forever,” updated based on personal conversation with Dr. John Ehrenfeld in October 2017: North American indigenous peoples believe that all decisions should be taken with a view to how our seventh generation descendants would view the outcomes in their time of each decision we make today.

  3. 3.

    For a comprehensive exploration of the benefits and advantages of business modelling using business modelling tools, and iterative design approaches to strategy development compared to earlier analytical approaches see Hanshaw and Osterwalder (2015), Kiron, Kruschwitz, Reeves, and Goh (2013), Lindgardt, Reeves, Stalk, and Deimler (2009), Martin (2009) and Teece (2010).

  4. 4.

    See Upward and Jones (2016) and the work of the 1475+ global members of the Strongly Sustainable Business Model (SSBM) Group global community of innovation practice. The SSBMGroup is a knowledge mobilization initiative of the Ontario College of Art and Design University’s Strategic Innovation Lab. Background at slab.ocadu.ca/group/strongly-sustainable-business-model-group-ssbmg; learn more at wiki.SSBMG.com/home/streams, join at forum.SSBMG.com

  5. 5.

    This is known as “service dominant logic” (Echeverri & Skålén, 2011; Vargo, Maglio, & Akaka, 2008). Compare this to the earlier “product dominant logic” used as the theory behind Value Propositions in earlier business modelling tools (Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2009).

  6. 6.

    We use the inclusive terminology of improving situations and conditions, inspired by Appreciative Inquiry, rather than the more typical deficit-based thinking terminology of problem finding and problem solving. This increases the likelihood for stakeholders to co-create designs with fewer unintended consequences (Cooperrider & Srivastva, 1987).

  7. 7.

    See slides and video of this talk “What is a Successful Sustainable Business?” (Upward, 2017).

  8. 8.

    See growing list of published case studies www.flourishingbusiness.org/case-studies

  9. 9.

    We recommend using tools like Sinek’s “Golden Circle” to explore the “why (vision), how (mission), and what (strategy).”

  10. 10.

    REFOCUS on Sustainability—a program management and capability building method for sustainability inspired enterprise transformation towards realizing the Flourishing Imperative. It is another of the projects of members of the Strongly Sustainable Business Model Group: www.refocussustainability.com

  11. 11.

    Given the long history of business leveraging science for practical benefit and to mitigate risk, today it appears very uncommon for business people (or business scholars) to be interested in this question. Indeed, to the authors’ knowledge, the question “how we would know a truly sustainable business if we saw one (based on the best available science, ethical and human rights)?” was first asked at the launch of the pre-cursor project to the Future-Fit Business Benchmark in Toronto in 2012 (First author was present when Dr. Bob Willard posed this question at this event).

  12. 12.

    See also Chap. 17.

  13. 13.

    For more information see www.FutureFitBusiness.org. Includes details of leading enterprises adopting this benchmark, the 23 indicators and associated science-based future fitness benchmarks for “break-even” enterprise performance, an additional 20 “positive-pursuit” benchmarks that “remove obstacles to people’s wellbeing, reverse the effects of environmental degradation, or to help other organizations or individuals to improve their own future-fitness.”

  14. 14.

    There are currently no future fit, no truly sustainable companies in existence, based on the Principles of the Flourishing Imperative.

  15. 15.

    See also Chap. 17.

  16. 16.

    In the authors’ experience, as stakeholders’ learning journeys unfold they come to apply “the five transformational commitments” and similar ideas of stewardship to their life goals (Doppelt, 2012).

  17. 17.

    Stakeholders may wish to refer to several other perspectives on the principles developed and tested over the past decades:

    • Benefit Corporation “B-Impact Assessment” used by over 50,000 organizations world-wide (B Lab, 2008, 2016)

    • “Co-operative Principles” proposed at the very beginning of the co-operative movement in 1844 and recently updated for the 250 million people world-wide who are employed by co-operatives (International Co-operative Alliance, 1995)

    • The Local Economy Framework, aka “Localist Principles,” adopted by more than 30,000 members of the North American based BALLE (Business Alliance for Local Living Economies, 2016)

    • The UK based Transition Town’s ideas (Hopkins, 2008, 2011)

    • The PROmoting Business Excellence benchmark for Sustainability Excellence (PROBE Network, 2005)

    • Various standards and certification systems of the International Living Future Institute (2015).

  18. 18.

    To aid the reader in understanding the Flourishing Business Canvas, this manuscript is available via www.academia.edu/23769906/

  19. 19.

    The license is free, and includes an extended version of the Flourishing Enterprise Strategy Design Method introduced here. In return, the First Explorer provides meaningful feedback on their experience using the Toolkit. See www.flourishingbusiness.org/the-toolkit-flourishing-business-canvas/first-explorers-program/. Ultimately the Flourishing Business Canvas will be made widely available under a creative commons license (CC-BY-SA).

  20. 20.

    For an introduction to the financial business case for following the Principles of the Flourishing Imperative see Willard (2012). This book along with the companion website www.sustainabilityadvantage.com gives worked examples and a free to download Sustainability ROI Workbook to quantify the increased profit potential of following the Principles.

  21. 21.

    See also Chap. 1.

References

  • Ackoff, R. L. (1971). Towards a system of systems concepts. Management Science, 17, 661–671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ackoff, R. L. (1981). The art and science of mess management. Interfaces, 11, 20–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashby, W. R. (1958). Requisite variety and its implications for the control of complex systems. Cybernetica (Namur), 1, 83–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • B Lab. (2008). B Corporation – About B Corp – Our Declaration [WWW Document]. Retrieved February 2, 2011, from http://www.bcorporation.net/declaration

  • B Lab. (2016). Measures what matters most – The benefit impact assessment (BIA) [WWW Document]. Retrieved November 18, 2016, from http://bimpactassessment.net/

  • Barton, D., Manyika, J., & Williamson, S. K. (2017). Finally, evidence that managing for the long term pays off. Harvard Business Review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beer, S. (1994). Beyond dispute: The invention of team syntegrity. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blank, S. G. (2013). Why the lean start-up changes everything. Harvard Business Review, 91, 63–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broman, G. I., & Robèrt, K.-H. (2017). A framework for strategic sustainable development. Journal of Cleaner Production, 140, 17–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.10.121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Business Alliance for Local Living Economies. (2016). Local economy framework [WWW Document]. BALLE (Business Alliance for Local Living Economies). Retrieved November 18, 2016, from https://bealocalist.org/local-economy-framework/

  • Cooperrider, D. L. (2017). The quest for a flourishing earth is the most significant OD opportunity of the 21st century: How macro OD can be the most powerful form of Micro OD. OD Practitioner, 49, 42–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooperrider, D. L., & Srivastva, S. (1987). Appreciative inquiry in organizational life. In W. A. Pasmore & R. W. Woodman (Eds.), Research in organizational change and development (Vol. 1, pp. 129–169). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crutzen, P. J. (2002). Geology of mankind. Nature, 415, 23. https://doi.org/10.1038/415023a.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curry, A., & Hodgson, A. (Tony) (2008). Seeing in multiple horizons: Connecting futures to strategy. Journal of Futures Studies, 13, 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Boer, Y., van Bergen, B., McKenzie, M., Averchenkova, A., Gladwin, T. N., Lyon, T., et al. (2012). Expect the unexpected: Building business value in a changing world. KPMG International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doppelt, B. (2012). From me to we: The five transformational commitments required to rescue the planet, your organization, and your life. Sheffield: Greenleaf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dreborg, K. H. (1996). Essence of backcasting. Futures, 28, 813–828. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-3287(96)00044-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyson, R. G., Bryant, J., Morecroft, J., & O’Brien, F. (2007). The strategic development process. In R. G. Dyson & F. O’Brien (Eds.), Supporting strategy: Frameworks, methods and models (pp. 3–24). Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Echeverri, P., & Skålén, P. (2011). Co-creation and co-destruction: A practice-theory based study of interactive value formation. Marketing Theory, 11, 351–373. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470593111408181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrenfeld, J. R. (2000). Colorless green ideas sleep furiously: Is the emergence of ‘sustainable’ practices meaningful? Reflections, 1, 34–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrenfeld, J. R., & Hoffman, A. J. (2013). Flourishing: A frank conversation about sustainability. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elkington, R., & Upward, A. (2016). Leadership as enabling function for flourishing by design. Journal of Global Responsibility, 7, 126–144. https://doi.org/10.1108/JGR-01-2016-0002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Future-Fit Business Benchmark©. (2018). Explore the goals. Retrieved August 3, 2018, from http://futurefitbusiness.org/break-even-goals/

  • Hanshaw, N., & Osterwalder, A. (2015). The business model canvas: Why and how organizations around the world adopt it. A field report from Strategyzer. Strategyzer and Business Models Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S. L., & Sharma, S. (2004). Engaging fringe stakeholders for competitive imagination. Academy of Management Executive, 18, 7–18. https://doi.org/10.5465/AME.2004.12691227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson, A. (Tony), & Midgley, G. (2014). Bringing foresight into systems thinking: A three horizon approach. Presented at the 58th Meeting of the International Society of the Systems Sciences (ISSS) (pp. 1–12).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogeboom, O. (2015). Applying the lean start-up methodology in social purpose start-ups (Masters). Reading: Henley Business School, University of Reading.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogeboom, O. (2019). Lean startup for social enterprises: What must change and why for entrepreneurs to flourish. In A. Upward (Ed.), Montreal, Canada. (forthcoming)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins, R. (2008). The transition handbook: From oil dependency to local resilience. Totnes: Green Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins, R. (2011). The transition companion: Making your community more resilient in uncertain times. Totnes: Green Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoveskog, M., Halila, F., Mattsson, M., Upward, A., & Karlsson, N. (2017). Education for sustainable development: Business modelling for flourishing. Journal of Cleaner Production, 172, 4383–4396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.04.112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Co-operative Alliance. (1995). Co-operative identity, values & principles [WWW Document]. Retrieved April 1, 2015, from http://ica.coop/en/whats-co-op/co-operative-identity-values-principles

  • International Living Future Institute. (2015). Living product challenge 1.0 – A visionary path to a regenerative future (Standard). Seattle: International Living Future Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, P. H., Christakis, A. N., & Flanagan, T. R. (2007). Dialogic design for the intelligent enterprise: Collaborative strategy, process, and action. Presented at the Proceedings of International Council on Systems Engineering 2007 (INCOSE 2007) (pp. 1–16).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendall, G., & Willard, B. (2017). Future fit business benchmark – Release 2 (Electronic). London: The Natural Step and Future-Fit Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keyes, C. L. M., & Haidt, J. (2003). Introduction. In C. L. M. Keyes & J. Haidt (Eds.), Flourishing: Positive psychology and the life well lived (pp. 1–14). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kinkead, G. (1999). In the future, people like me will go to jail. Fortune, 139, 190–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiron, D., Kruschwitz, N., Reeves, M., & Goh, E. (2013). The benefits of sustainability-driven (business model) innovation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 54, 69–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurucz, E. C., Colbert, B. A., Lüdeke-Freund, F., Upward, A., & Willard, B. (2016). Relational leadership for strategic sustainability: Practices and capabilities to advance the design and assessment of sustainable business models. Journal of Cleaner Production, 140, 189–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.03.087.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langenwalter, G. A. (2007). The squeeze: A novel approach to business sustainability. Dearborn, MI: Society of Manufacturing Engineers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laslo, C., Brown, J., Ehrenfeld, J. R., Gorham, M., Barros-Pose, I., Robson, L., et al. (2014). Flourishing enterprise: The new spirit of business. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lindgardt, Z., Reeves, M., Stalk, G., & Deimler, M. S. (2009). Business model innovation: When the game gets tough, change the game. New York: BCG – The Boston Consulting Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magretta, J. (2002). Why business models matter. Harvard Business Review, 80, 86–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, R. L. (2009). The design of business: Why design thinking is the next competitive advantage. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Max-Neef, M., Elizalde, A., & Hopenhayn, M. (1991). Human scale development: Conception, application and further reflections. Uppsala: Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation; The Apex Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H., & Waters, J. A. (1985). Of strategies, deliberate and emergent. Strategic Management Journal, 6, 257–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neumayer, E. (2013). Weak versus strong sustainability: Exploring the limits of two opposing paradigms (pp. 296–296). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Osterwalder, A. (2004). The business model ontology: A proposition in a design science approach (pp. 1–172).

    Google Scholar 

  • Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2009). Business model generation: A handbook for visionaries, game changers, and challengers. Amsterdam: Alexander Osterwalder & Yves Pigneur.

    Google Scholar 

  • PROBE Network. (2005). PROBE for sustainability excellence [WWW Document]. Retrieved January 22, 2018, from http://probe-network.com/probe-solutions/probe-for-sustainability-excellence/

  • Ries, E. (2011). The lean startup: How today’s entrepreneurs use continuous innovation to create radically successful businesses. New York: Crown Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Science, 4, 155–169. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01405730.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robèrt, K.-H. (2002). The natural step story: Seeding a quiet revolution. Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, J. B. (2003). Future subjunctive: Backcasting as social learning. Futures, 35, 839–856. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-3287(03)00039-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharpe, B. (2013). Three horizons: The patterning of hope. Axminster: Triarchy Press Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1956). Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological Review, 63, 129–138. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0042769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinek, S. (2009). Start with why: How great leaders inspire everyone to take action. London: Penguin Publishing Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. (2010). Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long Range Planning, 43, 172–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2009.07.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UN General Assembly. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development – The sustainable development goals. New York: United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Upward, A. (2017). What is a successful sustainable business? Copenhagen Business School Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility in the Department of Management, Society and Communication. https://www.academia.edu/35429864

  • Upward, A., & Jones, P. H. (2016). An ontology for strongly sustainable business models: Defining an enterprise framework compatible with natural and social science. Organization & Environment, 29(Special Issue: Business Models for Sustainability: Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and Transformation), 97–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026615592933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vargo, S. L., Maglio, P. P., & Akaka, M. A. (2008). On value and value co-creation: A service systems and service logic perspective. European Management Journal, 26, 145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2008.04.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willard, B. (2012). The new sustainability advantage: Seven business case benefits of a triple bottom line (Completely rev. 10th anniversary. ed.). Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. OCAD University, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Antony Upward & Stephen N. Davies

  2. Edward James Consulting, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Antony Upward

  3. Hamlstad University, Halland, Sweden

    Antony Upward

  4. Transformation by Design Business Consulting Inc., Toronto, ON, Canada

    Stephen N. Davies

Authors
  1. Antony Upward
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stephen N. Davies
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Antony Upward .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Neu-Ulm University of Applied Sciences, Neu-Ulm, Germany

    Thomas Wunder

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Upward, A., Davies, S.N. (2019). Strategy Design for Flourishing: A Robust Method. In: Wunder, T. (eds) Rethinking Strategic Management. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-06014-5_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation