The Downside of (and Antidotes to) Unhelpful Stealth Sustainability

Several recent articles in this and a number of other related journals, as well as Academy of Management and other sustainability-related conference presentations, have focused on the concept, practice, and results of “greenwashing,” or the making of sustainability claims for products, processes, and organizations that are unwarranted, if not wholly untrue. As important as that topic is to the field of organizations and environment, the opposite may be equally problematic— sometimes referred to as “brownwashing,” which may be a form of stealth sustainability, the latter of which has also been described as smarter sustainability marketing. However, for several years, I have been using the term stealth sustainability in a different way. The latter is the implementation of sustainability projects and achievement of sustainability results that are not acknowledged publicly and, at times, are hidden from the general public, media, and/or other stakeholders to the detriment, rather than for the benefit, of advancing sustainability. Stealth sustainability can occur at any level of human activity, including the individual, organizational, community, and societal levels, and given the nature of anything that is stealthy, it is often difficult to detect and, therefore, also difficult to emulate or to improve. That is, stealth sustainability can be far less helpful than it might be. But given the generally positive feedback most sustainability entities would likely receive if their respective sustainability profiles were made visible, why would individuals, organizations, and others adopt and practice a stealth sustainability strategy? Possible reasons for this counterintuitive approach are fear of being scrutinized; fear of eventual conceptual, product, or project problems including failure; and fear of raising expectations, both internally and externally, that even more or better sustainability projects will be developed on an ongoing basis in the future. Another reason, which has been the focus of one use of the term brownwashing (Kim & Lyon, 2014), is the fear that one or more stakeholders might not look favorably on the idea or the results of sustainability management. So fear may be a major generalized factor in why those who engage in sustainability management may be hesitant to make that information public. However, as understandable as that emotion is, several other human characteristics, including altruism, self-pride, leadership, and rationality, may be summoned to balance out those fears. Why would such a transformation of human motivation and behavior be beneficial? If, as it appears, both environmental and socioeconomic sustainability need to be advanced to become central organizing principles in all human cultures, significant numbers of individuals, organizations, networks, and communities within those cultures apparently need to not only adopt and execute sustainability projects but also need to promote both their successes and their nonsuccesses, so that we can learn from one another and use those lessons to improve and increase those sustainability projects so that they diffuse throughout, and eventually shape, our cultures in sustainability directions. No promotion, no learning, no advancement.