Essay: Org Change Management Practices & Sustainability Strategies.

1.Change management practices and sustainability strategies

You are required to critique the effectiveness of a corporate social responsibility strategy and change management practices that includes employee organizational behaviours including attitudes to achieve sustainability in your chosen organization.

You need to clearly identify what your chosen organisation’s sustainability strategy is that you want to introduce into the organisation. This could be the result of an issue or opportunity that needs to be addressed.

Your critique needs to answer the following:

i)  Provide ONE sustainability strategy. Discuss why it is important to your chosen organisation’s reputation and commitment to sustainability 

ii)  Critique the possible impact(s)of your sustainability strategy on five pillars of sustainability (economic, environmental, political/justice, cultural and social). 

iii)   Provide and then discuss a well-known change management process that could be used to introduce the sustainability strategy that you have provided in question i).

iv)  What are the advantages and disadvantages of your chosen change management process? (6 marks)

v)  How will you implement the change management process into your chosen organization? (6 marks)

vi) How will you deal with employees behaviours including negative attitudes of those employees who might resist the introduction of your sustainability strategy?

2.Corporate governance and sustainability

You need to provide an in-depth evaluation and critique of the effectiveness of corporate governance in achieving one sustainability outcome that you have provided in question 1.

i)  Discuss fourreasons why the corporate governance of your chosen organization is important to the sustainability strategy that you have provided in question 1 i); 

ii)  Discuss how one potential dilemma, for your chosen organisation regarding the implementation of your sustainability strategy, might affect 3of your chosen organisation’s stakeholders marks for a discussion of the impact of the dilemma on each stakeholder for a possible 12 marks total).    .

iii) How might your chosen organization deal with/resolve the sustainability-stakeholder dilemma that you have given in question 2 ii)?

The Environmental Sustainability Strategy

Introduction

This paper explores the effectiveness of a sustainability strategy and change management initiatives on a financial institution in New Zealand. The financial institution chosen is Westpac New Zealand, a leading bank with over 197 branches in the country. Westpac New Zealand operates under three major brands and serves over 1.5 million customers. Their range of services includes retail banking, loan services, mortgage services, investment services and asset management among others. The Bank is headed by a Chief Executive Officer with 8 senior managers reporting directly to him (Wilson, Rose & Pinford, 2011).

Westpac NZ has a robust corporate social responsibility strategy. This has not only helped to assist many people in New Zealand but also has enabled the bank to build a strong reputation for a sustainable business (Singleton & Verhof, 2010). In essence, this partly explains why the bank has been operating in New Zealand for the last 157 years. This report however critically looks at how the environmental sustainability strategy and how it impacts the bank. In addition, the report interrogates the change management process in order to infuse the environmental sustainability strategy. Finally, the report will inquire the impacts of the change management process at Westpac NZ including the resulting effects on the employees.

The Environmental Sustainability Strategy

Within Corporate Social Responsibility, the environmental sustainability strategy cannot be understated. Westpac NZ has a variety of mechanisms in place to ensure that they conduct their business while caring for the environment. The company, for instance, is involved in regular environmental conservation like regular tree planting to combat desertification. Westpac also spearheads green energy sources for its operations with a focus on solar energy. To reduce environmental resource utilization, Westpac NZ has embarked on minimal paper usage by orienting their operations towards paperless technologies such as information technology (Melville, 2010).

The company has also continuously contributed financial resources to pro-environment charities such as Non-governmental organizations advocating for wildlife conservation, green energy, waste management and climate change. Moreover, Westpac NZ is at the forefront in encouraging the use of environmentally friendly house construction materials. To this end, the company has subsidized house investment plans using prefabricated materials (Sinha & Akoone, 2010).

Why Environmental Sustainability Strategy is important to Westpac NZ

To begin with, environmental strategy enables Westpac to comply with government regulations in New Zealand. The Government abides by the international environmental policies such as United Nations Framework on Climate Change, the Kyoto protocol on greenhouses gas emissions and other international treaties. Likewise, it has enacted local laws like the Environmental reporting act of 2015 and the climate change response act of 2002 to ensure environmental protection (Chapin et al., 2010).

Companies that do not abide by the government regulations are disadvantaged in business through high taxation, government quotas, and outright business limitations. To safeguard its reputation and commitment to sustainability Westpac took early measures to ensure compliance hence increasing its competitive advantage (Porter & Kramer, 2011).

Environmental Strategy is important to Westpac NZ in the attraction of Customers. This is because customers are more than ever before conscious of the companies that take an initiative in environmental conservation and shun those that disregard environmental sustainability. Furthermore, customers want to be associated with companies that care for the environment and Westpac NZ capitalizes on this trend (Crews, 2010).

Why Environmental Sustainability Strategy is important to Westpac NZ

The strategy has helped Westpac NZ to make strategic alliances with global companies that employ similar environmental strategies. To this end, Westpac has partnered with other banks that have adopted environmental standards such as Barclay's Bank, the Allied Irish Bank, Bank of America and BNP Paribas to increase business transactions and offer their customers flexibility. This improves their reputation and commitment to environmental sustainability by associating with like-minded businesses (Lennox, Proctar & Russel, 2011).

Westpac has also benefited from the Environmental Strategy by attracting high qualified employees. This enables the bank to come up with solutions that are difficult to imitate by competitors which act as a barrier to entry to competitors. The employees are attracted to work for Westpac because of their commitment to environmental sustainability which also improves on social welfare of New Zealand citizens (Singleton & Verhof, 2010).

The environmental sustainability strategy is also important to Westpac NZ because it has enabled the company to reduce the operating costs. Just like many companies that have adopted a paperless technology, the bank reaps the advantages of fewer space requirements for storage which equates to a reduced cost of operating the business (Williams, 2013). Similarly, Westpac has reduced cost by using energy efficient equipment through a partnership with pro-environment suppliers.

Westpac NZ has encouraged innovation by employing environmental sustainability strategies. The bank, for instance, has benefited from increased mortgage by using low funding low cost environmentally friendly prefabricated houses. Just like employees of organizations that have similar strategies, Westpac employees and suppliers are forced to think of innovative ways to implement the strategy by coming up with innovative solutions such as electronic banking that eliminate paper usage and promote customer satisfaction at the same time (Chiaroni, Chiesa & Frattini, 2011).

By adopting environmental sustainability, Westpac also realizes the benefits accrued from reduced operational risks. These could stem from association with environmentally insensitive companies or from noncompliance with environmental regulations which could spiral antitrust suits and other legal cases. This ostensibly implies that the bank is able to benefit from lower business risks, legal suits, and the associated costs (Kolk, 2008).

The Bank has realized improved productivity by sticking to the environmental sustainability strategy. Firstly, Westpac realizes that by encouraging environmentally friendly technology such as mobile banking and electronic transactions, customers are able to make and receive payments faster while at the same time reducing the labour required to attend to the customers at the banking halls (Brooks & Cubero, 2009).

Critical analysis of possible impacts on the five pillars of sustainability

Economic Pillar

The economic pillar is traditionally tied to the purpose of firms. In the economic sense, all firms exist primarily to maximize shareholder wealth. There are other reasons why firms exist. These include maximizing of employee emoluments, meeting societal financial stability among others. From the foregoing, the economic pillar features dominantly on the role of the firms (Lapeley, 2017).

That notwithstanding, it has become quite clear that the pillar cannot be self-sustaining without the duty of care for the environment. For this reason, many firms such as Westpac NZ have to abide by the environmental strategy to guarantee economic sustainability. The strategy impacts the economic pillar in many ways (Moldan, Janouskova & Har, 2012).

On a positive note, the environmental strategy adopted by Westpac NZ especially with regard to energy-saving technologies, green energy, and zero carbon emission will lead to low cost of production hence increase the company profitability. This means that it will be a going concern capable of operating sustainably for the foreseeable future (Chapin et al., 2010).

In retrospect, the environmental sustainability strategy as adopted by Westpac with a focus on prefabricated houses offering low interest will lead to increased demand from customers leading to high debts. This is one of the reasons that led to the global economic crises as banks lend money to people mostly to buy homes. Eventually, the debts could not be paid leading to wanton foreclosures (Wilson et al., 2011).

The environmental strategy is also a byword for compliance with government regulations. As Westpac has adopted clean energy, which by extension means minimal carbon emissions, the government responds by reducing taxes and offering other subsidies. The net effect will lead to reduced government revenue collection (Seghezzo, 2009).

The adoption of efficient paperless electronic banking will lead to a reduction of labour at Westpac which in effect will increase unemployment and disposable incomes for a sizeable workforce (Chamberlain & Menclova, 2014). Similarly, the adoption of green energy and energy-saving strategies such as the use of LED lights will lead to two outcomes. Firstly, it will lead to low revenue collection by the power company and secondly, it will result in less demand for labour in the power companies leading to job cuts and ultimately low purchasing parity of people (Grant, 2008).

The environmental pillar

The environmental pillar is one of the most adopted by companies to enhance their sustainability (Butler, 2011). Many companies including Westpac have come to realize that by sustainably utilizing the environmental resources, they not only make savings but also resonate with customers thereby ensuring the success of their business. The strategy adopted has various potential impacts on the environment pillar.

Firstly, the environmental sustainability strategy on energy saving technologies and green energy will lead to fewer carbon emissions. This will lead to lower parts per million in carbon emissions leading to a reduction in greenhouse gas effects such as global warming and eventually climate change (Kleine, 2010).

Secondly, using paperless technologies such as electronic transactions and mobile cash transfers implies that there will be less waste of paper, cutting of trees and inefficient mining. This will, in turn, lead to meeting both national and international environmental conservation initiatives such as protection of rare and endangered species, combating desertification among other environmental concerns (Sharma & Khanna, 2014).

According to Sinha and Akoone (2010), Westpac has been a pivotal partner to New Zealand citizens by organizing tree planting events. Already the company has in conjunction with the citizens has planted thousands of trees. The net effect of such environmental endeavors will be the sustainability of the country's water towers.

The strategy also aims at forming sustainable relationships with suppliers (Anderson & Noblet, 2012).  This means that the suppliers have to meet environmental obligations such as the supply of equipment and material with low carbon emissions and employing material life cycle processes in their production. This will lead to better air quality and reduction in waste during production.

The strategy also encourages the acquisition of equipment and material that is recyclable. It requires the employees to lead by example through proper disposal of the electronic waste to allow for eventual recycling thereby reducing exploitation of environmental resources (Garard & Kowarsch, 2017).

Lastly, the strategy may impact negatively on the environment by encouraging new forms of energy and electronic technologies that lead to new cases of environmental pollution. For instance, lithium-ion phosphate required in the manufacture of batteries used for wind and solar energy leads to more pollution eventually than using fossil fuels (Crews, 2010).

Impacts on political/justice pillar

The environmental strategy will lead to conformance with human rights regulations due to the fact that environmental sustainability and human rights are in many ways intertwined. It may also lead to civil unrest due to unemployment resulting from less need for labour as eco-friendly technology is less labour intensive. For this reason, unemployment could be a growing concern in the country as companies focus on green technologies (Chamberlain & Menclova, 2014).

On the political pillar, the environmental strategy will lead to efficient use of resources and eventually Lowe cases of legal redress. Research has shown that there is an inverse relationship between the number of legal cases filed and a company's pro-environment strategies. This implies that the political risk of conducting business will drop significantly as companies focus more on environmental sustainability (Lepeley, 2017).

The environmental strategies will lead to fewer regulations that in the end stifle companies from achieving their full potential. With lower carbon emissions, prudent environmental management, and sustainable resource utilization, there will be less need for political oversight, and punitive laws for nonconformance with environmental sustainability (Fabian, 2015).

The environmental strategies may in retrospect, lead to new forms of regulations and policies on new green technologies such as in the use of wind energy, solar energy and hybrid energy technology (Jamali & Rabbath, 2008).

Cultural pillar

According to Michelon, Boessso, and Kumar (2012), the cultural pillar focuses on the way of life for the population. This in many ways touches on religion, the way of expression by the population, the diet, tourism and the artifacts held sacred by the population.

Since the environmental strategy promotes environmental conservation by advocating for methods that do not exploit the resources unsustainably, the culture of the people will be preserved (Tobias & Blakely, 2009).

The strategy will also promote tourism since environmental conservation will lead to protection of wildlife and cultural amenities. This will, in turn, benefit the communities economically and lead to more cultural preservation (Tobias & Blakely, 2009).

The cultural expression, religion, and diet for indigenous minorities will also be upheld since environmental degradation is one of the major causes for cultural erosion. The strategy will lead to less exploitation of environmental resources which interfere with the cultural regime (Seghezzo, 2009).

Social Pillar

The environmental strategy will lead to less equity in the social sphere. This is because if labour intensive technologies are ditched in favor of green efficient technology, many people will lose their jobs and this may lead to inequality in the society (Michelon et al., 2012).

The strategy will impact the social pillar positively by encouraging social diversity. This is because, for the strategy to be effective, it has to encourage the inclusion and participation of all stakeholders in the society (Moldan et al., 2012).

The environmental sustainability strategy will also impact positively on the quality of life. This is because, with environmental conservation, people can be able to access quality environmental services such as clean air, clean water and green energy (Peloza & Shang, 2010).

Lastly, it may lead to improved democracy as well as governance in the society as there will be fewer conflicts occasioned by the scramble for environmental resources. In the end, people will have a better governance structure (Grant, 2008).

A change management process to introduce at Westpac NZ

This report will focus on Kotter's 8 step change model (Kotter, 2008). The change management process will augur quite well with the Westpac NZ since the introduction of the environmental strategy is a new concept that requires transitioning. Fortunately, the best agents, who often are the management as per Kotter's model, recognize the importance of change for sustainability of the organization.

Kotter's change model involves eight steps. The first step is creating the urgency for change. For change to be successful at least over three-quarters of the management have to buy into the change. The management, in this case, must inform the employees why it is necessary to adopt change. When the employees understand the need for change they will be champions of the change (Goksoy, 2015).

The second step involves coming up with a team that will oversee change. This includes identifying people in the organization with influential or leadership skills necessary to catalyze the change process. These people are less likely to face resistance and will be the pillar of the change process (Kotter, 2008).

The third process is to create a vision for change. This involves summarizing the most important things necessary for the change to happen. Afterward, a strategy must be devised to ensure that the team identifies the reasons for change (Orgland, 2014).

After the team internalizes the vision, the next step is communicating the need for the environmental strategy. This is important because the employees may forget it due to other communication processes within the company. It should be done frequently while at the same time addressing employees’ concerns, anxiety, and fear (Entrekin, 2014).

The fifth step is empowering the staff to commit to the change. This can be achieved by ensuring that the team already identified has the powers to drive the change strategy while at the same time assisting in addressing any obstacles in their way (Reiss, 2012).

The sixth step is to come up with short-term goals to initiate the change process. This involves creating milestones and targets that can be achieved within a specified duration. Rewarding the achievement of the targets builds momentum and motivates the employees to move proceed with the change (Samson & Bevington, 2012).

Many change initiatives fail because of inconsistency. To ensure that the change process is successful it is important to be persistent and keep on improving on the change process. It is important, therefore, to analyze what works and what does not and continuously improve on weak areas (Kotter, 2008).

Finally, it is necessary to ensure that the change management is permanently adopted by the company. This can be done by incorporating the changes achieved into the organizational culture. This ensures that the change becomes part of the organizational functions (Orgland, 2014).

Advantages of Kotters’ Change Process

The first advantage of Kotter change management process is that it uses sequential steps that are easy to adopt while transitioning into a change. This allows the employees to adapt well to change (Pieterse, Caniels & Homan, 2012).

Secondly, the process focuses on the preparation of the change. The primary focus on management and the team to undertake change management ensures that everyone in the organization is part of the change (Kotter, 2008).

The transition into the change in this process is much easier than other processes such as the Lewin and McKinsey change processes. This is because it allows the change process to be smoother (Pieterse et al., 2012).

Disadvantages of Kotters’ Change Process

One disadvantage of the model is that it is a very long process that requires massive investment in time and managerial resources. Consequently, many employees may forget the process (Goksay, 2015).

Secondly, the steps taken in Kotter's model cannot be replaced or overlooked. This means that they have to be wholly undertaken. Any skip of the step results in failure within the whole model (Reiss, 2012).

How to implement the change management process in Westpac NZ

The first step is to evaluate the need for change and incorporate the same within the goals of Westpac NZ. To make the change effective, an evaluation to identify the resources required to implement the change is necessary. The change can then be gauged to ensure that it will move Westpac NZ in the direction envisaged (Orgland, 2014).

The second step in the implementation of the change at Westpac NZ will be to identify the impact of the proposed change in every department. This will enable early identification of the most affected individuals and how to introduce the change (Reiss, 2012).

Thirdly, it is important to come up with a communication strategy at Westpac NZ which will highlight the key areas of the change and the persons or team of people to communicate the change to the employees. The strategy will also identify the methods to communicate change such as meetings, and departmental group discussion and how to respond to employee anxiety (Entrekin, 2014).

The fourth step is to train the employees on the most effective skills required to implement the change. This will boost their morale and confidence in readiness to take on the change (Agboola & Salawu, 2010).

The next step is to ensure that there are rigid support mechanisms to assist the employees to move through the change at Westpac NZ. This is because any change will come with many requirements such as work restructure, doing away with some jobs and introducing new jobs. The support mechanisms will enable the employees to adapt to the change smoothly (Goksay, 2015).

Lastly, once the change has been initiated, the final step is to measure the change with regard to the anticipated results. This will help to establish where the change was successful and where it was not. Alternative methods can be employed to improve on the failed areas (Entrekin, 2014).

Dealing with employee behavior, negative attitude and, resistance to change

The first step in dealing with employee behavior and anxieties is ensuring proper communication is undertaken to enable them to realize the importance of the change. This can be done by discussing and demonstrating the change process in their areas of work (Pieterse et al., 2012).

The employees can also be involved directly in the change processes. This can be done by encouraging their participation in the change process and incorporating their views early enough. It is also important to listen to their views and reassuring them of job security (Entrekin, 2014).

Ensuring teamwork or esprit de corps. Teamwork in the design and introduction of the sustainability strategy will make the employees feel part of the change process instead of spectators or bystanders in the process (Orgland, 2014).

Coming up with super-ordinate goals. A super-ordinate goal can be realized by identifying a common denominator among the employees. One such goal is ensuring organization survival. The goal can be designed alongside the sustainability strategy such that employees work for the common good of the organization (Kotter, 2008).

Creating an effective support structure. The support structure identifies who in the workplace is most affected and comes up with mechanisms to alleviate negative impacts. The support structure could take the form of job restructuring or review which is then communicated to the employee (Reiss, 2012).

Employee motivation. This can be introduced in the form of short goals or targets which when achieved will lead to rewards. This builds the employee confidence in the change process and alleviates the resistance to change (Samson & Bevington, 2012).

Training the employees. This will give the employees the confidence to work on the new roles advanced by the change process. It will also improve their skill set to implement the job professionally (Entrekin, 2014).

Involving the team leaders or people with influence. Employees tend to listen to their team leaders such as union heads. By incorporating these leaders into the strategy, resistance to change can be overcome (Kotter, 2008).

Lastly, the threat of firing or negative motivation can be necessary where employees are inherently against the change despite addressing all their concerns. This can be done as the last resort (Fugate, Prussia & Kinicki, 2010).

Introduction

This section deals with corporate governance and sustainability. The section explores why corporate governance is important to the environmental sustainability strategy. Moreover, the section delves into the impacts a dilemma in implementing the environmental strategy can impact on the stakeholders. The section finalizes by discussing ways of resolving the dilemma with the stakeholders.

Reasons why corporate governance of Westpac NZ is important to the environmental sustainability strategy

Firstly, corporate governance ensures accountability within Westpac NZ. This is because one of the principles of corporate governance clearly stipulates the role of the shareholders, the responsibilities that accompany the board of directors at Westpac NZ and lastly the role of the stakeholders within Westpac NZ. For this reason, everyone in Westpac knows their responsibility. This enables the environmental strategy to be swiftly implemented by the responsible parties within the organization. Decisions are made and implemented seamlessly (Hamson, Bosse & Philips, 2010).

Should there be a problem with the implementation of the environmental strategy, it is very easy to identify the responsible party. As a result of prudent accountability, the board can be held responsible if there is a problem in execution of the strategy by the management because they appoint them. Similarly, the management is accountable in case there is a strategy execution problem with the employees because they hire the employees. It is the responsibility of the board to invite the shareholders to the annual general meeting to get the progress of Westpac NZ. The Stakeholders such as customers have to be respected (Lee, 2014).

Secondly, corporate governance ensures transparency within Westpac NZ. This is achieved by the disclosure of the roles and responsibilities of all parties working for Westpac NZ. The implementation of the environmental strategy can then be transparent to all parties interested in the organization (Jamali & Rabbath, 2008).

An important aspect of transparency is the availing of information about the company management for shareholders to scrutinize and disclosure of all information concerning Westpac NZ investment decisions. This ensures that the environmental strategy is executed and all information communicated to the stakeholders (Lennox et al., 2011)

Thirdly, corporate governance is important in the reduction of business risks at Westpac NZ. By the fact that everyone’s actions are accounted for, implementation of the environmental sustainability strategy can be actualized without any cases of banking malpractices or fraud. In case of any fraud, the responsible party can be identified and held to account without failing the entire Westpac NZ Bank. The Bank also has a self-regulatory policy that can bring persons accountable to strategic malpractices to book internally (Bebchuk, Cohen & Ferrel, 2008).

Lastly, corporate governance exemplifies Westpac NZ public relations and public image. This enables the implementation of the environmental sustainability strategy with help from the local communities. As a result of the unconditional disclosure of the company information to stakeholders, Westpac is widely trusted and enjoys support from the public. The roles and responsibility principle that ensures accountability helps Westpac to maintain a good public image and conduct its business ethically because the stakeholders have access to information on the Bank operations (Anderson & Noblet, 2012).

How one dilemma at Westpac regarding the implementation of environmental sustainability strategy might affect 3 stakeholders

Different stakeholders have different environmental expectations from Westpac NZ. The dilemma here is choosing an environmental sustainability strategy that is accepted by all the stakeholders. Similarly, there is the dilemma of environmental sustainability versus financial performance within the organization. In order to maintain its public image, Westpac may fail to disclose the environmental strategy information. While on one hand, the corporate governance principle stipulates the full disclosure of information to stakeholders, on the other hand, the management in Westpac NZ may be inclined towards financial performance. Non-disclosure of the information couldn't have potential repercussions to the stakeholders (Bebchuk et al., 2008).

The government

The government has stringent rules and regulations to safeguard the environment. Failure to report the on environmental obligations may pass unnoticed in the short-term. The government will fail to achieve its responsibility for safeguarding the environmental standards for the citizens of New Zealand. In its international obligations, the government will also report wrong information on its environmental targets to the international community. In the long-term, the government may undertake an environmental audit and realize the discrepancy which may lead to legal suits including the closure of Westpac NZ (Peloza & Shang, 2010).

The shareholders

The shareholders have entrusted the business to the management with the expectation that due diligence is followed in the disclosure of information. Failure to disclose environmental information during the implementation of the strategy may result in loss of assets to the shareholders in case of Westpac is shut down by the government. Once the shareholders learn of the violation from other sources other than Westpac they may lose their trust with the board and the management. Consequently, they may force out the board or withdraw their shares (Bhagat & Bolton, 2008).

The employees

The failure to disclose environmental information to the employees may lead to loss of employees who were attracted by the company’s commitment to the environment. It may also result in cases of dishonesty amongst the employees. Lastly, they may also lose their jobs, in the long run, should the violation be exposed and the company shut by the government (Harrison et al., 2010)

How Westpac will deal with the sustainability-stakeholder dilemma

Stakeholder collaboration

To ensure that Westpac and the stakeholders resolve the sustainability versus the profitability dilemma, collaboration in the sustainability strategy would help to maintain a good working relationship. Collaboration could take the effect of projects like tree planting, creating environmental awareness and waste recycling (Lennox et al., 2011).

Process innovation

To resolve the environmental sustainability strategy versus profitability dilemma, Westpac NZ could start new innovative processes to solve environmental problems. For instance, Westpac NZ has started funding house construction using prefabricated materials instead of resource-intensive traditional mortal and timber houses. This has the potential to endear the company to the customers while making profits (Lee, 2014).

Creating Shared Value (CSV)

In this approach, Westpac could identify an environmental problem that they can resolve by creating a profitable business while at the same time solving the environmental problem. This leads to environmental conservation and profits for the company at the same time (Porter & Kramer, 2011).

Benchmarking

There are many cases where sustainability-profitability dilemma cases have been resolved amicably in other parts of the world. Nestlé, for instance, resolved their water problems in North America by involving local communities. Westpac can adopt measures used elsewhere to resolve the dilemma (Crews, 2010).

Communication

Communication is quite an effective method when it comes to resolving the dilemma. The stakeholders will understand if Westpac is open to dialogue to resolve the dilemma (Garrard & Kowarsch, 2017).

Compromise

Westpac NZ can compromise on some of their profitability ventures and give the environmental sustainability strategy efforts an upper hand. This will gain them customers and they can recoup their investment by capitalizing on more sales (Harrison et al., 2010).

Conclusion

In conclusion, this paper has identified a suitable environmental sustainability strategy which can be explored by Westpac NZ to enhance their business. The paper has shown the ways that the bank stands to benefit from the strategy. Moreover, the paper has revealed how the strategy can be introduced in the bank, and how change management from the introduction can be handled. Further, the paper has discussed corporate governance and how it can help to streamline the strategy within its operations. Finally, the paper has discussed the stakeholder-sustainability dilemma and how it can be resolved.

References

Agboola, A., & Salawu, R. (2010). Managing Deviant Behavior and Resistance to Change. International Journal Of Business And Management, 6(1), 45-48.

Anderson, M., & Noblet, C. (2012). Giving voice to the future of sustainability: Retrospective assessment to learn prospective stakeholder engagement. Ecological Economics, 84, 1-6.

Bebchuk, L., Cohen, A., & Ferrell, A. (2008). What Matters in Corporate Governance?. SSRN Electronic Journal, 22(2), 785-792.

Bhagat, S., & Bolton, B. (2008). Corporate governance and firm performance. Journal Of Corporate Finance, 14(3), 257-265.

Brooks, R., & Cubero, R. (2009). New Zealand bank vulnerabilities in international perspective(pp. 30-46). Washington, D.C: IMF.

Butler, T. (2011). Compliance with institutional imperatives on environmental sustainability: Building theory on the role of Green IS. The Journal Of Strategic Information Systems, 20(1), 6-9.

Chamberlain, D., & Menclova, A. (2014). The effects of unemployment rate fluctuations on private health insurance coverage in New Zealand. New Zealand Economic Papers, 49(2), 157-167.

Chapin, F., Carpenter, S., Kofinas, G., Folke, C., Abel, N., & Clark, W. (2010). Ecosystem stewardship: sustainability strategies for a rapidly changing planet. Trends In Ecology & Evolution, 25(4), 241-249.

Chiaroni, D., Chiesa, V., & Frattini, F. (2011). The Open Innovation Journey: How firms dynamically implement the emerging innovation management paradigm. Technovation, 31(1), 34-43.

Crews, D. (2010). Strategies for Implementing Sustainability: Five Leadership Challenges. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 75(2), 15-20.

Entrekin, L. (2014). Human resource management and change: a practicing manager's guide(1st ed., pp. 42-45). London and New York: Routledge.

Fabian, L. (2015). Strategic information systems management for environmental sustainability(6th ed., pp. 104-108). Berlin: Druck Publishers.

Fugate, M., Prussia, G., & Kinicki, A. (2010). Managing Employee Withdrawal During Organizational Change. Journal Of Management, 38(3), 890-900.

Garard, J., & Kowarsch, M. (2017). Objectives for Stakeholder Engagement in Global Environmental Assessments. Sustainability, 9(9), 1571.

Grant, S. (2008). Contextualising social enterprise in New Zealand. Social Enterprise Journal, 4(1), 9-23.

Goksoy, A. (2015). Organizational change management strategies in modern business (pp. 143-150). Bulgaria: IGI Global.

Harrison, J., Bosse, D., & Phillips, R. (2010). Managing for stakeholders, stakeholder utility functions, and competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 31(1), 58-74.

Jamali, D., & Rabbath, M. (2008). Corporate Governance and Corporate Social Responsibility Synergies and Interrelationships. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 16(5), 443-459.

Kleine, A. (2010). Sustainability-driven implementation of corporate social responsibility: application of the integrative sustainability triangle. Strategic Direction, 26(5), 517-533.

Kolk, A. (2008). Sustainability, accountability and corporate governance: exploring multinationals' reporting practices. Business Strategy And The Environment, 17(1), 1-15.

Kotter, J. (2008). Force for Change: How Leadership Differs from Management (7th ed., pp. 35-60). New York: Free Press.

Lee, E. (2014). Corporate Governance and Firm Performance: Empirical Analysis Using CGS Corporate Governance Scores. Productivity Review, 28(1), 385-392.

Lennox, J., Proctor, W., & Russell, S. (2011). Structuring stakeholder participation in New Zealand's water resource governance. Ecological Economics, 70(7), 1381-1389.

Lepeley, M. (2017). Five Pillars of Organizational Quality and Global Sustainability (pp. 32-36). [S.l.]: Greenleaf Publishing.

Melville, N. (2010). Information Systems Innovation for Environmental Sustainability. MIS Quarterly,34(1), 1-6.

Michelon, G., Boesso, G., & Kumar, K. (2012). Examining the Link between Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility and Company Performance: An Analysis of the Best Corporate Citizens. Corporate Social Responsibility And Environmental Management, 20(2), 81-94.

Moldan, B., Janouskova, S., & Hak, T. (2012). How to understand and measure environmental sustainability: Indicators and targets. Ecological Indicators, 17, 4-8.

Orgland, M. (2014). Initiating, managing and sustaining strategic change (pp. 30-35). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Peloza, J., & Shang, J. (2010). How can corporate social responsibility activities create value for stakeholders? A systematic review. Journal Of The Academy Of Marketing Science, 39(1), 117-135.

Pieterse, J., Caniels, M., & Homan, T. (2012). Professional discourses and resistance to change.Journal Of Organizational Change Management, 25(6), 798-818.

Porter, M., & Kramer, M. (2011). Strategy & Society: The Link between Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility (pp. 1-6). Boston: Havard Business Review.

Reiss, M. (2012). Change Management: A Balanced and Blended Approach (pp. 93-99). Norderstedt: Books on Demand.

Samson, D., & Bevington, T. (2012). Implementing Strategic Change (1st ed., pp. 16-24). London: Kogan Page.

Seghezzo, L. (2009). The five dimensions of sustainability. Environmental Politics, 18(4), 539-545.

Sharma, J., & Khanna, S. (2014). Corporate Social Responsibility, Corporate Governance and, Sustainability: Synergies and Inter-relationships. Indian Journal Of Corporate Governance,7(1), 14-38.

Singleton, J., & Verhoef, G. (2010). Regulation, deregulation, and internationalization in South African and New Zealand Banking. Business History, 52(4), 540-553.

Sinha, P., & Akoorie, M. (2010). Sustainable Environmental Practices in the New Zealand Wine Industry: An Analysis of Perceived Institutional Pressures and the Role of Exports. Journal Of Asia-Pacific Business, 11(1), 50-74.

Tobias, M., & Blakely, T. (2009). Changing trends in indigenous inequalities in mortality: lessons from New Zealand. International Journal Of Epidemiology, 38(6), 1711-1715.

Williams, C. (2013). Principles of management (pp. 20-28). Boston: South-Western Cengage Learning.

Wilson, W., Rose, L., & Pinfold, J. (2011). Moderating risk in New Zealand retail banks: Disclosure as an alternative regulatory regime. Journal Of Banking Regulation, 13(1), 4-23