Net Positive: a radical shift in leadership and economics

Sensemaking / Net Positive: a radical shift in leadership and economics

Leaders are fundamentally rethinking their strategy to contribute more to the economy than they take.

By Anna Simpson / 28 Nov 2017

What impact do you want to have?

Much conversation and action for sustainability over the last couple of decades has focused on reducing our negative impact – particularly environmental impacts. But what about the postive impact we actually want to create? Now, a new wave of ‘Net Positive’ leaders are looking to see how they can increase their overall positive impact to the economy as a whole.

This is a radical shift in mindset, and requires a major reworking of strategy. In our latest futures webinar, Ben Kellard – who leads Forum for the Future’s work on transformational strategy – put forward the case for Net Positive leadership today, and described what this means for businesses, and crucially, how to begin.

One major source of impetus towards a Net Positive future is the Sustainable Development Goals: the set of 17 ambitions that were adopted by world leaders in 2015, offering all sectors for the first time a common framework for transformation. These aren’t just a useful communications tool for framing existing corporate action, Kellard observed: they actually call for a step-change in the role of business in developing a resilient economy. He referred to the flagship report of the Overseas Development Institute which says that five goals call for a complete reversal in current trajectories – if we are to reduce inequality and the growth of slums, combat climate change, reduce waste, and protect marine environments. 

Reversal in outcomes demands a reversal in both mindset and strategy, says Kellard.

A traditional approach works from ‘Inside Out’: business leaders consider first what is of importance to the business and to its stakeholders. It is a reductionist stance, looking at the organization’s goals in isolation. This approach usually results in incremental steps that maintain the status quo.

Kellard calls for an ‘Outside In’ approach: first businesses need to look outside, at what the world needs – drawing on frameworks such as the SDGs, or the 5 Capitals, or The Natural Step.


Then they work back to discover what its role is in delivering this future – by mapping the key systems they rely upon, and the relationships and dynamics within them.

This puts into sharp relief both the gaps and risks as well as the unmet needs and opportunities to deliver that future.

Finally, the organisation can identify its focus areas and role in creating the transformative impact required. Where can they innovate products and services? Who do they need to collaborate with? What supporting infrastructure can they help to build to enable full market transformation? What new technologies will help to transform the system as a whole? These questions will lead them to a new purpose, new targets, new ways of operating, new business models.  

How many companies are ready to embrace such an agenda?

Fifteen major global players have joined the Net Positive Project as founding members: among them Kingfisher, Levi Strauss & Co, and Capgemini.


They are working towards a world where companies drive financial success and create ‘Net Positive’ impacts by putting back more into society, the environment, and the global economy than they take out

– supported by a number of organisations, including Forum for the Future and Business for Social Responsibility.

For example, Kingfisher has taken a lead in setting out a Net Positive strategy, which includes the aspirations to create more forest than it uses towards the goal of global net reforestation, support consumers to generate more energy than they consume, enable net positive lifestyles and develop skills in the communities where it operates. To build such a strategy, Kingfisher looked ahead to the year 2050 – the sort of timeframe Kellard says is required for such a degree of transformation, and at such a scale.    

Mars is another example that Kellard highlights. While the company hasn’t yet set out a Net Positive strategy, it has looked at the Stockholm Resilience Centre’s nine planetary boundaries (land use, freshwater use, biogeochemical flows and so on), and asked what these boundaries mean for them. This resulted in a new strategy for sustainability, which includes targets such as zero net growth in land use across its value chain, and then looks beyond the language of ‘zero’ to positive aspirations such as soil health, community regeneration and climate smart agriculture – as part of its ‘Sustainable in a Generation’ plan.

Looking out – both to the long-term future and to the extent of the planet’s resources – helped Kingfisher and Mars find their focus areas, identify opportunities and set goals within them. During our webinar, Bob Willard of Sustainability Advantage raised the question of whether the Net Positive Project is working on a list of focus areas in which Net Positive transformation is particularly needed or ripe: no, it isn’t currently, replied Kellard – referring back to the SDGs as a starting framework. We’re keen to hear your thoughts: is this something that’s holding your business back?   

Phil Clarke, Director at Consciam Ltd, asked what other obstacles might be keeping businesses from embracing a Net Positive agenda. Again, we’re interested to hear what they are for your business, if any. The scale of transformation required can be an inhibiting factor, said Kellard, as well as knowing where and how to begin – and, of course, in the face of the immediate pressure of providing shareholder returns.

Conversely, what supporting factors are helping businesses make a start?

Stories of transformation are beginning to emerge and inspire leaders to look at their future differently, as well as transparency around current impacts and dependencies. Do you have a story to share?  

Here’s one thing that’s becoming clear. It’s a peculiar kind of ambition that’s required: not one that sets a firm target and moves unblinking towards it, but one that is sensitive to a continually shifting landscape, and humble in recognising its own fragility in this context, as well as its potential force.



Here are some signals of change you have spotted around the Net Positive movement. How far towards Net Positive do you think they go?

GE is offering free online learning certificates plus guaranteed interviews to Massachusetts residents

GE is offering free online learning certificates plus guaranteed interviews to Massachusetts residents, through the online learning platfrom The offer is a collaboration between the platform, founded by Harvard and MIT, working with GE and Microsoft to provide high quality courses that lead directly to employment opportunities.

Pret trials in-store filtered water refills to phase out plastic bottles

Pret is offering filtered water in an in-store trial. It might not seem like a big thing until you remember that Pret makes money mainly from selling bottled water. What the press release doesn't mention is the difficult "business case" discussions they no doubt had before this got a green light.

More signals around the net positive movement can be found here.


Watch the full webinar here: Play recording

Contact Ben Kellard for help in transforming your strategy, and to join the Net Positive Project.

What might the implications of this be? What related articles have you seen?

Note please that if growth is imperative, as it is under the current system of money creation, that no matter how well intentioned, any such attempt must fail. Case in point IKEA's super ambitious plan to be using 60% sustainably sourced wood by 2035. If they grow at the current rate they still use more unsustainable wood than they do now. It is physically impossible to decouple quantitative growth from thermodynamic throughput.

0 users have voted.
Please register or log in to comment.