Is Sustainability the Death of Business Strategy?

When market share is no longer the goal, what is strategy for?

Sustainability puts strategy in a weird place. Image generated with Leonardo AI

When market share is no longer the goal, what is strategy for?

About ten days ago, I had a conversation that’s been quietly transforming how I think about strategy.

Kerrin Naudé, a South African sustainability and strategy consultant with a background in marketing, said something that struck a chord:

“Sustainability puts strategy in a weird place. It’s no longer about outcompeting. It’s about contributing to something bigger than any one company.”

At first, it felt like a paradox. How could the foundational discipline of competitive business—strategy—coexist with a paradigm like sustainability that demands collaboration, humility, and systemic thinking? But the more I sat with it, the more it made sense.

Traditional strategy, after all, is inherently adversarial. Since Michael Porter’s seminal work in the 1980s, strategy has largely been defined as a way of carving out competitive advantage. Find a distinctive position in the market. Build a moat. Beat the competition. Secure your share of the pie.

Marketing has long been the engine of that differentiation—grabbing attention, creating brand loyalty, staking out mental real estate. It’s about being seen as better, smarter, faster, or more innovative than everyone else.

But sustainability doesn’t care about your brand equity.

It cares about whether your company’s existence is compatible with the survival of planetary life systems.

It forces a shift from relative performance—how well you’re doing compared to others—to absolute thresholds—how well you’re doing in relation to ecological and social boundaries.

That’s a profound reframing. And one that puts classical strategy on unstable ground.

Strategy in a Finite World

Let’s consider the assumptions baked into conventional strategy:

• Growth is good.

• Winning is better than cooperating.

• Success is measured in relative terms (market share, brand preference, revenue growth).

• Competitive advantage is the goal.

But sustainability—when it’s not watered down to greenwashing—questions all of this.

It asks:

• Growth at what cost, and for how long?

• Winning what, if the planet loses?

• Relative to what—other companies, or the carrying capacity of the biosphere?

• What if the real advantage is in cooperating faster, deeper, and more intelligently than others?

In a finite world, the strategies that once made sense now require deep reassessment.

The New Constraints Are Collective

There’s a seductive narrative in capitalism: that the market rewards excellence, and that competition spurs innovation. In many cases, that’s true. But climate collapse, biodiversity loss, and systemic inequality aren’t problems that get solved faster when everyone competes harder.

They require shared rules, mutual restraint, and collective commitments. They require not just innovation but coordination.

And here’s the rub: when every actor in a system must obey the same planetary boundaries, the strategic “degrees of freedom” start to collapse. Your options narrow—not because you’re less innovative, but because there’s less moral or ecological room to maneuver.

Suddenly, the playing field is level—but not in the celebratory, equal-opportunity sense. It’s level in the sense that gravity is bearing down on everyone, and no brand can market its way out of sea level rise.

So What Happens to Strategy?

Some might say: if we all have to operate within the same constraints, doesn’t that kill the point of strategy?

Not quite. It changes its purpose.

Old question:

How do we beat the competition?

New question:

How do we contribute to the system in a way no one else can?

Old goal:

Maximize shareholder value.

New goal:

Maximize long-term viability—of your business, your stakeholders, and the systems that sustain you.

This reframes strategy from war game to ecosystem design.

Strategy as Stewardship

Imagine a world where:

• The goal isn’t to be the biggest emitter with the greenest logo, but the company that helps others decarbonize too.

• You don’t hoard data or IP, but open-source the tools that could shift your entire industry.

• You stop seeing supply chains as cost centers and start treating them as vital organs in a shared body.

In that world, strategy is less about fencing off your territory and more about ensuring the soil doesn’t erode beneath everyone’s feet.

This might sound utopian—but it’s already happening in pockets:

• Patagonia restructured itself so that its profits flow toward protecting the planet.

• Interface, the carpet manufacturer, reimagined itself as a regenerative company decades before it was fashionable.

• Unilever, for all its flaws, has been pushing the concept of brands with purpose—even if that sometimes lands awkwardly.

These firms aren’t abandoning strategy. They’re elevating it—embedding it within a broader context of systems thinking and long-term value creation.

The End of Strategy—or Its Renaissance?

So is sustainability the death of business strategy? Maybe it’s more accurate to say: sustainability is the end of strategy as we knew it.

And maybe that’s a good thing.

If strategy is fundamentally about making choices under constraints, then we are now living in the most strategically interesting era of all. The constraints are no longer just economic—they are physical, social, and moral.

In that light, the strategist’s job doesn’t vanish. It matures. It asks:

• What choices will make us relevant and resilient in a net-zero world?

• How do we grow within limits?

• How do we define success when everyone’s fate is intertwined?

These aren’t abstract questions. They’re strategic imperatives.

The Bottom Line: Strategy Gets a Level-Up

If you’re reading this as someone who practices strategy—whether for a firm, a client, or an investment portfolio—you’re not being sidelined. You’re being called to lead.

But you might need to trade your sword for a compass.

The path forward isn’t about sharper elbows. It’s about clearer intentions, deeper foresight, and more radical collaboration. The work of strategy is still to make decisions in uncertainty. It’s just that now, the uncertainty is existential.

Kerrin was right. Sustainability does put strategy in a funny place. But maybe that’s where strategy was always meant to go.

---

Wangari’s Curated Reads

• Heather Baker’s article is a call to action for businesses to take AI seriously—not as a passing trend, but as a core strategic priority. She offers a free, practical one-page template to help companies align AI experiments with real goals, assign clear responsibilities, and evolve their efforts over time. It's especially useful for mid-sized organizations without massive innovation budgets, showing how to integrate AI into team development, product improvement, and customer experience without losing the human touch.

• Melissa Amos unpacks the messy reality of “following your intuition” in business, showing how what we think of as inner guidance is often clouded by fear, trauma, and cultural conditioning. Drawing a parallel with intuitive eating, she illustrates how reclaiming true intuition requires deep self-awareness, healing, and unlearning. It’s a powerful reminder for entrepreneurs and creatives that authentic direction isn’t just a feeling—it’s a practice, and one that starts with knowing yourself more deeply than ever before.

• Carola Verschoor argues that in today’s shifting world, strategy alone can’t carry the weight of meaningful change—transformation design must join the table. While strategy helps organizations navigate known terrain, transformation design leans into uncertainty, asking deeper questions about purpose, impact, and what kind of future is worth building. For Wangari Digest readers working on systemic, social, or ecological change, this piece offers a powerful lens: transformation isn’t just about having a better plan—it’s about imagining better paradigms.

---

One Smart Question