1 Insights into sustainability

“Sustainability” and “sustainable development” are increasingly popular catchwords in media. Individuals associate them with environmental protection or climate change and may think of related names, such as Greta Thunberg and the global climate strike movement #FridaysForFuture, or climate activists, such as #LastGen in Austria and Germany. Although the environment is a central aspect of sustainable development, it is only one dimension. Sustainable development comprises an economic, social, and environmental dimension (United Nations General Assembly 2015). Due to the interlinkages of the three dimensions, they all must be considered to achieve sustainable development and sustainability. The overarching goal of sustainable development is a sustainable future for our planet and for present and future generations in the North and South (United Nations 2012).

1.1 Sustainable Development

As part of the Conference on Sustainable Development of the United Nations, which took place in Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) in June 2012, the commitment to “make every effort to accelerate the achievement of the internationally agreed development goals, including the Millennium Development Goals by 2015” was reaffirmed (United Nations 2012, p. 1). On September 25, 2015, the General Assembly approved the 2030 Agenda titled “Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” (United Nations General Assembly 2015). This agenda announced 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and associated 169 targets, which should be achieved by 2030. The targets are integrated and interlinked. Areas of critical importance for humanity and the planet are people, the planet, prosperity, peace, and partnership. This new universal agenda and the SDGs should, therefore, stimulate action to foster humanity and the planet (United Nations General Assembly 2015).

The core idea of sustainable development of the United Nations is that the development of societies (global, national, regional) must be oriented toward the overarching goal of satisfying the basic needs of all people and ensuring a good quality of life. To this end, natural resources must be preserved and handed over to future generations to satisfy their needs and allow them to live good lives. This emphasizes the comprehensive time horizon of sustainable development. Therefore, as defined by the United Nations, sustainable development is a realizable vision of societal development, including a long-term perspective based on a positive, optimistic attitude (United Nations 2012; United Nations General Assembly 2015).

Research plays a significant role in promoting the achievement of the SDGs (United Nations General Assembly 2015). For example, research has highlighted the usability of co-created knowledge within transdisciplinary and interdisciplinary projects related to sustainable development (Jacobi et al. 2020; Schneider, Giger et al., 2019). Schneider, Kläy, et al. (2019) highlighted the role of science in achieving the SDGs. They suggested four specific tasks: (1) “Unraveling and reflecting on the ethical values involved in sustainability,” (2) “Spelling out what sustainability values guide research,” (3) “Finding common ground on what sustainability means in specific contexts,” and (4) “Reflexive clarification of researchers’ own normative and epistemological ground” (Schneider et al. 2019, Table 1). Moreover, Messerli et al. (2019) explicitly called for action from the sciences (e.g., strengthening human well-being and capabilities). In disciplines such as accounting (Bebbington and Unerman 2018) and management (Bansal 2019), there have been discussions on the role of research in achieving the SDGs. Within this special issue “Shaping organizations sustainably” in the journal Gruppe. Interaktion. Organisation. we highlight research predominantly from applied psychology (i.e., work, organizational, and business psychology; environmental psychology) and sociology, investigating how organizations and their actors (e.g., employees) foster sustainability, as it is of utmost importance to reduce the research-practice gap linked to sustainability. We shed light on sustainability in the organizational context within our special issue, “Shaping organizations sustainably,” addressing the role of the individuals (e.g., employees, leaders, customers), the organization, and central stakeholders (e.g., policy makers, research institutions).

1.2 Sustainability perspectives in the organization: SDGs, CSR, ESG

The SDGs are important in organizations for several reasons. They provide a comprehensive framework for organizations to align their sustainability efforts and focus on the most pressing issues facing the world today. In doing so, research is increasingly oriented toward an integrated view of sustainability (Ranjbari et al. 2021). The SDGs encourage collaboration among organizations, governments, and civil society to achieve shared sustainability goals. Collaboration can lead to shared knowledge and resources, innovation, and practical solutions to complex sustainability challenges. The SDGs aim to address some of the most pressing environmental and social challenges facing the world today, such as climate change, poverty, and inequality.

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria have emerged as pivotal frameworks in assessing modern organizations’ sustainability and ethical comportment. CSR delineates an organization’s voluntary commitment to operating ethically and contributing positively to society, transcending mere legal obligations. It encompasses societal, environmental, and economic initiatives, covering the central three dimensions within the framework of the SDGs, emphasizing stakeholder engagement and sustainable development practices. ESG criteria, on the other hand, pivot around three core pillars: environment (e.g., climate, resource scarcity, biodiversity), social responsibility (e.g., health and safety), and robust governance practices (e.g., risk and reputation management, compliance). They provide a comprehensive framework for evaluating an organization’s non-financial performance and impact. Environmental metrics gauge an organization’s ecological footprint and efforts to mitigate climate change and preserve natural resources. Social indicators encompass employee welfare, community engagement, human rights, and diversity initiatives. Governance criteria encompass board diversity, transparency, integrity, and adherence to ethical standards.

CSR and ESG criteria are benchmarks for assessing corporate sustainability and ethical conduct, facilitating informed investment decisions, and fostering a culture of accountability and transparency within the corporate landscape (Raupp et al. 2011). They underscore businesses’ need to harmonize economic pursuits with social and environmental imperatives, contributing to a more equitable and sustainable future. Therefore, we can assume that the actions within the organizations are linked to sustainability, and the ESG and CSR are directly related to specific SDGs. Due to the EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (European Parliament & Council of the European Union, 16.12.2022), large organizations and listed organizations must publish regular reports on the social and environmental risks they face. Moreover, they must report how their activities impact people and the environment. More organizations and stakeholders worldwide are developing related requirements and criteria (e.g., World Bank, 2024). As a result, an increasing number of companies are currently implementing sustainability reporting metrics (World Economic Forum 2024). Since many criteria must be considered and reported, various providers offer their services, or provide helpful resources, such as good practice notes, templates and checklists (e.g., World Bank, 2024).

2 What we know about sustainability in organizations

Organizations can contribute to global efforts to create a more sustainable and equitable world by prioritizing the SDGs. After the energy industry, manufacturing and industrial processes are Germany’s second-largest emitter of CO2 emissions (Umweltbundesamt 2022). The Covid-19 pandemic has further strengthened the sustainability efforts of many organizations (e.g., Barreiro-Gen et al. 2020). The profound disruptions caused by the pandemic and war currently offer the potential for organizations to achieve changes to SDG 9 (resilient infrastructure, inclusive and sustainable industrialization, and innovation) and SDG 12 (sustainable consumption and production patterns; see Ranjbari et al. 2021). Organizations are increasingly under pressure from key stakeholders, such as customers, investors, and employees, as well as regulatory changes, to take on social responsibility (Campbell 2007; McWilliams et al. 2006; Pfeffer 2010). This is demonstrated, for example, by a recent study in the banking sector (Siddique et al. 2023). Prioritizing the SDGs also presents opportunities. It can create new business opportunities by identifying unmet social and environmental needs, driving innovation, and creating new markets. By addressing sustainability issues, organizations can develop new revenue streams, increase profitability, and develop a more resilient business model.

Many sectors are increasingly focusing on sustainability. For instance, in agriculture, there are efforts to achieve greater decarbonization in food production, where great potential is seen in the circular economy and local production (Adelodun et al. 2021). The pressure to act is tremendous in energy-intensive sectors such as the iron and steel industry, and the chemical industry (Rajabloo et al. 2022), while at the same time new technical processes are seen as offering enormous potential for savings (cf. Harpprecht et al. 2022; Hebeda et al. 2023; Xin et al. 2023). The aviation industry is looking for alternatives to fossil kerosene, but at the same time, it faces phenomena such as flight shame (Lai et al. 2022). The healthcare sector accounts for an enormous share of CO2 emissions and thus has a high savings potential (cf., Lenzen et al. 2020). The design of complex organizations such as hospitals towards more sustainable action must consider the perspectives of very different groups, some of which may be contradictory (see Hildebrand et al. 2022). In other public institutions such as universities, opportunities to save energy have also been investigated for individual groups, such as students (e.g., Kaiser et al. 2005), or employees (e.g., Endrejat et al. 2017), or across groups (e.g., Heib et al. 2023), as well as the effectiveness of participatory interventions (Endrejat and Kauffeld 2018).

Increasingly, research is addressing topics such as green HRM (Dumont et al. 2017), leader green behavior (Zacher et al. 2024), green employee behavior (Endrejat et al. 2015; Katz et al. 2022; Norton et al. 2015; Zacher et al. 2023), and factors that contribute to moving this behavior in the desired direction (Kim et al. 2017; Norton et al. 2015, 2014). Schultes et al. (2019) highlight the central importance of psychology in contributing to achieving the SDGs. For example, to develop evidence-based interventions, implement them with multiple stakeholders, and evaluate whether and how the interventions led to desired changes (e.g., Endrejat et al. 2015; Klonek and Kauffeld 2016). Grainger-Brown and Malekpour (2019) clarified what tools exist for organizations to contribute to achieving the SDGs. The complete list of tools can be found online in the article’s supplemental material by Grainger-Brown and Malekpour (2019). They identified a thematic typology of tools/frameworks that are currently available to organizations for action towards the SDGs (cf. Grainger-Brown and Malekpour 2019, p. 9, Table 2): The tools are linked to (a) mapping (e.g., the SDG Compass by UN Compact), (b) reporting (e.g., Global Reporting Initiative), or (c) aligning (e.g., ‘Sustainable value exchange matrix’). It was found that most tools were limited to reporting, thereby helping organizations with performance benchmarking and reporting against the SDGs. These types of tools do not activate the transformational processes needed to contribute to achieving the SDGs. Moreover, current research suggests that many organizations are only superficially engaged with the SDGs, indicating a process of SDG washing (Heras-Saizarbitoria et al. 2022). Against the backdrop of this tension between opportunities (e.g., innovations) and possible risks (e.g., green and SDG washing), this special issue likes to provide insights into the current efforts of organizations, highlighting its relevance to fostering the achievement of the SDGs. Moreover, we discuss implications for future research and develop preliminary recommendations for practice.

3 What the Special Issues articles are adding

The issue contains eight articles within the special issue section. The special issue aims to compile current findings from empirical (quantitative and qualitative) and theoretical-conceptual studies on sustainable development and sustainability in organizations in various practice fields (e.g., agriculture, aviation, higher education). In this way, an insight into the current state of research is provided, and practical examples for implementing sustainability in the organizational context are given.

3.1 Insights into different levels and effects

To shed light on the similarities and differences between the articles, we linked them to the levels they are addressing and identified different types of effects. Hierarchical levels of analysis are essential because they provide a structured framework for systematically exploring complex phenomena. Examining phenomena across multiple levels makes identifying patterns and relationships between different factors possible. This multi-level approach facilitates a more comprehensive understanding of phenomena, enabling researchers to generate more nuanced theories and develop effective interventions informed by a holistic perspective. These levels, which include (a) individual, (b) group/team, (c) organizational and work context, and (d) environment, society, and culture, serve as analytical frameworks that facilitate comprehensive investigation and comprehension of complex systems. At the individual level, focus is directed toward individuals’ attributes, behaviors, and cognitive processes, such as employees or clients. Moving to the group/team level, attention shifts to the dynamics and interactions among individuals within groups (e.g., work teams). The organizational and work context level extends the analysis to the broader structural and systemic influences within which individuals and groups operate. The work context considerations encompass physical, social, and temporal dimensions, reflecting the broader organizational environment in which work occurs. The macro level includes the environment, society, and culture, encompassing the external forces and contextual factors shaping the sustainability of and within organizations. Within such systems are different types of effects, for instance, single-level effects (e.g., behavior of person A changes behavior of person B; single-level effect at the individual level), top-down effects (e.g., top-down direct effects from the organization to the individual: Organizational factors such as policies, procedures, and culture shape behavior and decision-making, influencing performance of employees), and bottom-up effects (e.g., effects from the individuals to the organization). In the following, we identify and discuss the levels and effects discussed within the special issue articles (cf. Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Central effects of the special issue contributions. Note. 1. Kortsch & Händeler, 2. Heib et al., 3. Veit et al., 4. Johannessen et al., 5. Ritter et al., 6. Wihler et al., 7. Hilbert et al., 8. Gebker et al.

Full size image

3.2 Assignment of the special issue articles to the levels and effects

Kortsch and Händeler (2024; article 1) shed light on customer behaviors. Using a quantitative approach including a partially experimental design, they investigate the sustainable purchase behavior in online flight booking. The results showed that the customers always preferred the cheapest compensation packages, while absolute price did not play a role. This shows how airlines can change the sustainable choice behavior of customers in favor of increased sustainability. The results are directly linked to SDG 12 (responsible consumption and production) and SDG 13 (climate action), highlighting a top-down direct effect from the organization to the customer at the individual level.

Heib et al. (2024; article 2) investigate factors shaping the sustainable energy behavior of various university stakeholders. Using a quantitative approach, they showed group differences and highlighted how personal and social norms interact. The results are directly linked to SDG 12 (responsible consumption and production) and SDG 13 (climate action), highlighting a top-down direct effect from different groups to the employees at the individual level and a bottom-up effect from the individuals to the groups.

Veit et al. (2024; article 3) provide a theory-based framework on the link between employee green behavior and digital technologies. They identify key characteristics digital technologies should possess to (indirectly) promote employee green behavior. Moreover, they derive practical recommendations for organizations and decision-makers to improve organizational sustainability. Therefore, they highlight a top-down direct effect of the technologies used within organizations on the employees at the individual level. The results are directly linked to SDG 12 (responsible consumption and production) and SDG 13 (climate action).

Johannessen et al. (2024; article 4) shed light on the importance of the emotions of regenerative farmers in Norway and its link to climate change using a qualitative approach, including observations and interviews. This article highlights the challenges of specific industries (here: farming) and workers within such industries (here: regenerative livestock farmers) as they are confronted with tensions between the economic, sustainability, and social aspects of farming. The article is linked to SDG 12 (responsible consumption and production) and SDG 15 (life on land). The article highlights a top-down direct effect from the organization and industry level on the employees’ emotions at the individual level.

Ritter et al. (2024; article 5) use a conceptual approach. They develop a unified collaborative action plan, which can serve as a resource for the transformation task for researchers and practitioners. The action plan offers insights and strategic directions for implementing circular economy practices. The article directly and explicitly addresses SDG 17 (partnership for the goals). The article highlights the single-level effects at the organizational level by discussing the crucial role of cooperation between different actors, such as organizations, and between science and practice across disciplines.

Wihler et al. (2024; article 6) highlight the importance of leadership within organizations in implementing circular business models. They provide an integrative taxonomy, the Big X of leadership. Based on this, it can be assumed that it is necessary to have change-oriented leaders who are well-versed in other leadership orientations (i.e., progress, principle, performance, and people) to successfully generate, implement, and facilitate positive environmental change. The article, for instance, addresses SDG 12 (responsible consumption and production) and SDG 17 (partnership for the goals). The article highlights top-down and bottom-up effects across the individual, group, and organizational levels.

Hilbert et al. (2024; article 7) develop a theoretical model providing insights into a physically embedded framework for recovery from work. The authors highlight that people need space for recreational leisure activities. Therefore, the article has several practical implications for policymakers. This article highlights the interrelation of SDG 3 (good health and well-being), SDG 8 (decent work and economic growth), SDG 11 (sustainable cities and communities), SDG 13 (climate action), and SDG 15 (live on land). The article highlights top-down direct effects from the physical environment in the broader and organizational context to the individual (e.g., recovery experiences, health and well-being outcomes) and a bottom-up direct effect from the individual to organizational outcomes.

Gebker et al. (2024; article 8) are shedding light on the backcasting method by using an example of “Electrification of agriculture in 2045”. The combination of visualization and object-supported backcasting proved to be a promising methodology for strengthening the understanding of the system, facilitating the ability to discuss more sustainable futures, and generating a communicable output about a complex future, including transformation paths. Moreover, measures for achieving more sustainable futures can be extracted and evaluated. However, backcasting requires a constant reassessment of the transformation and continuous comparison of the emerging visions of the future within the team and, therefore, requires resources, such as time and material. The article highlights complex relationships across levels and addresses SDG 17 (partnership for the goals) linked to the method used and implicitly SDGs related to the case (e.g., SDG 12, responsible consumption and production).

4 Towards a comprehensive understanding

4.1 Uniting what we know: Similarities and differences between the SI articles

4.1.1 Methodological approaches

In this special issue, it is noteworthy to observe that 50% of the papers constitute conceptual explorations (cf., Hilbert et al. 2024; Ritter et al. 2024; Veit et al. 2024; Wihler et al. 2024), underscoring the significant theoretical advancements within the field of sustainability in the organizational context. Presently, there exists a prevailing tendency within this research field towards the dissemination of comprehensive articles, including reviews, meta-analyses, and conceptual papers (e.g., García-Arca et al. 2024; Zacher et al. 2024, 2023), even if the topic per se is not new (cf. Osbaldiston and Schott 2012; Wiernik et al. 2013), it again gained momentum. This phenomenon underscores the abundance of extant research, facilitating the summarization of the current state of knowledge. However, it also highlights the nascent stage of research, characterized by the absence of standardized conceptual frameworks and models. These observations delineate a burgeoning field at the intersection of work and organizational psychology, environmental psychology, and related disciplines, such as management and sociology. The conceptual papers delve into the fundamental frameworks and paradigms that underpin various aspects of sustainability in and of organizations (e.g., behaviors of customers, employees, and leaders; circular economy). They contribute to the theoretical scaffolding and provide critical insights for future empirical investigations.

Furthermore, this special issue encompasses a qualitative (Johannessen et al. 2024) and two quantitative contributions (Heib et al. 2024; Kortsch and Händeler 2024), reflecting the multifaceted nature of research methodologies employed in contemporary scholarly debates. Qualitative analyses offer nuanced understandings of phenomena, delving into the intricacies of human behavior, perceptions, and experiences (here: emotions). Conversely, quantitative studies leverage statistical analyses to discern patterns, relationships, and trends, offering empirical validation and generalizability to theoretical propositions. Additionally, including a case study (Gebker et al. 2024) enriches this special issue by providing contextualized examinations of real-world phenomena within specific organizational, societal, or cultural contexts (here: electrification of agriculture). Case studies allow readers to delve deeply into complex phenomena, unraveling intricacies and uncovering unique insights that may not be readily apparent through traditional research approaches.

The conceptual papers, qualitative and quantitative contributions, and case studies presented in this special issue converge to advance our understanding of shaping organizations sustainably, foster interdisciplinary dialogue, and shed light on new avenues for future research endeavors. By synthesizing diverse perspectives and methodologies, this collection encapsulates the dynamic and evolving landscape of contemporary scholarship in the field.

4.1.2 Direct effect between levels and single-level effects

As can be seen in Fig. 1, most of the articles discussed bottom-up and top-down direct effects. In particular, the relation between the individual level (i.e., micro level) and the organizational and work context level (i.e., meso level) was frequently addressed. The macro-level was included much less regularly, and top-down and bottom-up effects were examined seldomly simultaneously across different levels. Exceptions to this are, for example, Hilbert et al. (2024) and Gebker et al. (2024).

4.1.3 Sustainable Development Goals

Not all SDGs were addressed equally in the special issue. This is due, for example, to the fact that a specific target group (i.e., readers, such as practitioners and researchers, of the journal) and research questions from one subject area (i.e., studies on sustainable development and sustainability in organizations in various practice fields) were addressed as part of the special issue. SDGs relating to social sustainability were addressed less frequently. However, work and organizational psychology and related disciplines are already significantly contributing to these areas, for example, in research about decent work (e.g., Blustein et al. 2023; Frey 2018; Kreinin and Aigner 2022; Pereira et al. 2019). Within our issue, however, there is a strong focus on SDG “responsible consumption and production,” SDG 13 “climate action,” and SDG 17 “partnerships for the goals.”

4.2 What we still need to know: Four avenues of future research

It is essential to derive avenues for future research based on current developments and the latest publications. For instance, Nielsen et al. (2024) presented six recommendations for study individual climate behavior (i.e., 1. study a wider range of behaviors, 2. address the complexity of behavioral determinants, 3. study mitigation of potential behavior change initiatives, 4. diversify and augment methods, 5. evaluate heterogeneity, generalizability, and robustness, and 6. integrate and theorize). Following such an approach, we will provide insights into avenues of future research on sustainable development of organizations within the following section. We identified four central topics: 1. test and validate the newly developed frameworks, 2. systematically report the alignment of the work with the SDGs, 3. conduct interdisciplinary research across levels, and 4. diversify methods.

The conceptual models and theoretical assumptions presented for the first time in this special issue should be examined in future research. It is essential that forthcoming studies rigorously test and validate the frameworks through empirical investigation. By doing so, researchers can ensure the robustness and applicability of their models, facilitating more informed scientific discourse and practical implications for organizations. This imperative underscores the necessity for future research endeavors to bridge the divide between theoretical assumptions and empirical findings, thereby advancing the collective knowledge base on central topics linked to the sustainable development of organizations.

Future research should systematically report the alignment of the work with the SDGs and explicitly identify the relevant SDGs. By integrating this practice into scholarly discourse, researchers can contribute to the global agenda of sustainable development and demonstrate the societal relevance of their findings. For example, there are positive examples that you can use for inspiration (e.g., Carr et al. 2023). Furthermore, discussing the practical implications for organizations at the meso level and contextual considerations at the macro level is essential. This approach ensures that research outputs contribute to theoretical advancements and offer tangible insights for organizational decision-making and broader socio-economic contexts, such as policymakers. By addressing these levels, researchers can enhance their work’s practical relevance and societal impact, thereby fostering more meaningful contributions to academic scholarship and real-world applications.

In future research endeavors, scholars should continue to adopt an interdisciplinary approach (e.g., Gebker et al. 2024; Ritter et al. 2024) that examines reciprocal and complex relationships across multiple levels. By transcending traditional disciplinary boundaries and embracing a holistic perspective, researchers can uncover nuanced dynamics that shape phenomena at various levels of analysis. This entails investigating interactions and feedback loops between individual, organizational, and societal factors and recognizing the interconnectedness of these levels. Such an approach enriches our understanding of complex phenomena and offers insights into how interventions at one level may reverberate across others. By embracing this multifaceted approach, researchers can advance scholarly discourse and generate actionable insights that resonate across different contexts, ultimately contributing to more comprehensive and impactful research outcomes.

The methodological diversity can be seen as a strength. Qualitative research design for explorative questions is as valuable as the longitudinal testing of hypotheses. Moreover, future research should consider the use of mixed methods approaches. They leverage the strengths of both qualitative and quantitative approaches, providing a more comprehensive understanding of complex phenomena. By combining diverse methods, it enhances the validity and reliability of research findings. Additionally, it enables researchers to address research questions from multiple perspectives, resulting in richer insights and potentially leading to more robust conclusions. In addition, experimental designs could provide fascinating insights into consumer behavior, particularly in decision-making. Conducting intervention studies with cooperation partners in practice would be desirable to develop evidence-based recommendations for practice. In conclusion, the insights gained from this special issue underscores the importance of shaping organizations sustainably and highlights four central avenues for future research.

4.3 How organizations can already start doing: Recommendations for practice

Practice should be aware of the different levels, such as the individual, team/group, organization, and broader macro context, including the environment, society, and culture. Recognizing the interrelated nature of these levels is essential. Therefore, we highlight the importance of taking an active role and addressing multiple levels to acknowledge the significance of both top-down and bottom-up effects. It is, thus, necessary to encourage employees, teams, and the organization to engage in sustainable practices. Drawing from the literature reviewed in this editorial, we make various recommendations as starting points for practice (Table 1).

Table 1 Recommendations for organizations
Full size table

Implementing these recommendations can foster a holistic approach to sustainability within organizational settings, contributing to the achievement of the SDGs.

5 Conclusion

Exploring sustainability within organizations is imperative in today’s global landscape, marked by increasing environmental concerns, social inequalities, and economic instabilities. Through a comprehensive analysis of sustainability perspectives, including SDGs, CSR, and ESG principles, researchers have gained profound insights into the multifaceted nature of sustainable organizational practices. The articles featured in this special issue contribute significantly to our understanding of organizational sustainability. They have shed light on various methodological approaches, elucidated the direct effects between different levels of analyses, and emphasized the importance of several SDGs. There is still much to learn and explore in sustainable organizational practices. Future research should focus on bridging existing knowledge gaps and exploring new avenues, such as integrating sustainability into organizational decision-making processes, examining dynamic interrelationships between sustainability dimensions, and developing innovative strategies to address emerging challenges. In conclusion, the insights gained from this special issue underscore the importance of shaping organizations sustainably. By aligning organizational goals with broader sustainability objectives and adopting holistic approaches to decision-making, organizations can not only mitigate risks and enhance their resilience but also contribute positively to the well-being of society and the planet. Through collaborative efforts and ongoing scholarly inquiry, we can truly advance the agenda of sustainability in organizations and pave the way for a more equitable and sustainable future.