Sustainability and Business in a Complex World
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Sustainability is a topic of growing importance today in all aspects of organizational life. Businesses and managers are increasingly considering ways to incorporate a balance among economic, ecological, social, and cultural value creation into their business models. At the same time, the world is becoming exponentially more complex. Indeed, complexity theory and thinking are now apparent in academic and practice accounts of sustainability in business, as scholars and practitioners recognize the limitations of traditional reductionist approaches to systemic problems. To date, however, a more theoretical framing of sustainability lags behind accumulating practical evidence. The purpose of this article is to address this gap by developing a complexity‐based framework for understanding and managing sustainability in complex adaptive systems. We aim for simplicity, wholeness, and practicality in our approach, taking a qualitative rather than quantitative perspective on complex systems. Using several contemporary case examples, the article describes the important qualities of complex systems and develops them into a working framework that integrates principles and parameters of sustainability. In doing so, we create an approach to sustainability issues and dilemmas called “sustainability thinking.” The article concludes with more generalized sustainability action strategies for managers and recommendations for future researchers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it