1.-INTRODUCTION
My first approach to the idea of Stewardship was many years ago when reading the article written by Davis, J.H.; Schoorman, F.D. & Donaldson, L. titled “Toward a Stewardship Theory of Management”, published by the Academy of Management Review (1997, 22, 1, pp.20-47).
This seminal paper was oriented to propose the foundations of a new corporate governance system, under the basis of a different view of the relationship between shareholders and top managers, overcoming the theoretical limits of the dominant Agency Theory. In a nutshell, the Agency Theory represents an economic approach to governance, with a series of assumptions about the “model of man”, which draw a reductionist model of his behaviour: individualistic, opportunistic, self-serving (the “homo economicus” mould).
As clearly simplistic, additional theory was needed to explain other types of human behaviour, and this was found in literature beyond the economic perspective; to be more specific on the sociological and psychological sciences. The new steward mould was built based on an opposite “model of man”: collectivistic, pro-organizational and trustworthy, looking for the convergence of interest. Therefore, it is believed that:
-by working toward organizational, collective
ends, personal needs are met;
-its interests are aligned with that of the
corporation and its owners.
Therefore, a steward is motivated to maximize
organizational performance, thereby satisfying the interests of shareholders.
Because the steward perceives greater utility
in cooperative than in individualistic behaviour, and behaves accordingly, this
behaviour can be considered rational.
The table below summarizes the main psychological
and situational (or sociological) mechanisms characterizing the stewardship
approach:
MECHANISMS
|
|
PSYCOLOGICAL
|
-Motivation: higher
order needs (growth, achievement, self-actualization), intrinsic.
-Identification:
high value commitment.
-Power: Personal
(expert, referent).
|
SITUATIONAL
|
-Management
philosophy: involvement oriented.
-Risk orientation:
trust.
-Time frame: long
term.
-Objective:
performance enhancement.
-Cultural
differences: collectivism, lower power distance.
|
Source: Own elaboration based on Davis,
Schoorman and Donaldson (1997).
Therefore:
-Managers whose needs are based on growth,
achievement, and self-actualization; who are intrinsically motivated; who
identify with their organizations and highly committed to organizational
values, are more likely to serve organizational ends.
-Situations in which the managerial philosophy
is based on involvement and trust; the culture is based on collectivism and low
power distance, generally result in principal (shareholders)-steward (top
managers) relationship.
This stewardship approach has been also connected
with the idea of good governance, and its corresponding codes, enlarging its
scope from its original corporate perspective to a more comprehensive view
embracing the society as a whole.
In this venue, I can argue that steward
behaviour is a right way to facilitate collaboration among stakeholders through
a convergence of interests, and to promote a more responsible management on
available (limited) current resources, thinking on future generations.
2.-APPLICATION TO THE TOURISM INDUSTRY
Unemployment is, likely, the most serious
problem and concern in many European regions, especially in Southern countries.
The expectations of net employment generation, at least in the next few years,
are very limited in quantitative terms. These expectations are even worse when
watching the quality of that employment. In addition, the official data are
clear when pointing out the youth as deeply affected by this crisis.
Generally speaking, except for the new
technologies (ICTs, bio-genetics and others) and some particular niches such
as, using a colourful symbolism, those of green employment (environment and
tourism), blue one (energies, namely clean and renewable energies) and white
one (health and care of elderly/handicapped people as a result of an
increasingly aging population), the remaining industries have a problematic
growth forecast. Particularly in Spain, almost all the international employment
markets have better potential conditions, which add some more drama to this
landscape, which demands revisited our productive model seriously, including the education system at all levels, paying much
more attention to Research, Development and Innovation efforts.
Within this context, and ethical[1]
(although I prefer to say responsible) approach to the management of scarce
resources is more necessary than ever, both collectively and individually. As
any other value, this has to be assumed by each individual, and consistently
applied in our daily actions, bring it to the organizations and groups were we
belong to. Don’t wait that others do this job: do it yourself.
Sustainability is the great word, the paradigm
of the moment. Although it is not, by far, a new concept among specialists in
the academia, now it is part of the vocabulary of common citizenship, including
business people (their agendas and Board of Directors).
Nevertheless, when a word becomes popular and
is overused, not always properly, it tends to lose its authentic profiles,
creating confusion about its meaning. For example:
-A sustainable economy is not an artificially
sustained economy with endless grants and subsidies, although at the beginning
they were justified to signal a particular path to follow.
-Sustainable economies are not those
considering parameters of environmental protection only, forgetting the social
dimension of their decisions (for instance employment, without going further in
times of severe crisis). They are those able to find a certain room to balance their
economic, social and environmental dimensions.
The initial wave of quality management
certifications has been followed by others: safety, environmental management
systems... and we have a new one now (see ISO 26000): that of responsibility
(usually called Corporate Social Responsibility). Perhaps the term
responsibility is (or can be) better understood as sustainability: it is the
adoption of responsible
economic, environmental
and social behaviours.
Social responsibility has been generally conceptualized
as the option to go beyond the mere and strict enforcement of laws, therefore,
as something voluntarily self-imposed as an element of differentiation,
although institutional pressures (coercive, normative and mimetic pressures
–for more details see the contributions of the Institutional Theory-) are very
powerful forces to align and standardize behaviours in a certain way. Another
debate is whether these targets (certainly laudable) and such measures improve
the competitiveness of companies (in a short and medium / long term) in a
globalized economy (economic sustainability), as in the tourism industry. Or if
it has been inserted at the corporate level in the strategic decision-making
process, or, by the contrary, it is a mere marketing action of image washing.
Going to the particular activity of tourism,
and with very basic questions:
-Have all municipalities the potential to invest
and develop tourism? They have the right if they choose that path, of course,
but would not it be more responsible, for efficient and effective, the
concentration of public resources (now scarcer than ever) in those places and
economic activities with higher chances of success? Each territory must make
its bet for its own future, but it does not have to go through tourism
necessarily, as it seems in recent times.
-Have the authorities the courage to define
what is known as the carrying capacity of a specific place or resource, so that
the impact on the environment (the environment that we enjoy today is our main
asset for the future) is not too aggressive and, therefore, tourists and
residents can receive services with satisfactory levels of quality? For sure
that in the minds of all of us there are tourist areas whose planning seems to
have led to an overrun in the number of people that can coexist in harmony with
each other and with the environment in peak periods. Avoid overcrowding
perception is essential for not killing the "goose that lays the golden
eggs."
-Is a responsible economic bet the replacement
of stable industrial jobs, with a high level of skills, productivity and added value,
for seasonal jobs, medium to low skilled, with low productivity and added value,
which are the very majority of our tourist industry? Would not it be better to
bet, too, in favour of new technologies and innovation (in a broad sense) in
the tourism sector, that is, in favour of the generation of brainpower instead
of manpower (cheap and temporary)? Our competitiveness has to pass through
innovation, by the transfer of scientific, technical, artistic knowledge to the
productive tissue, by the enhancement of the new generated knowledge through
new companies. But this requires a strong support to rigorous and cutting-edge
research and innovative companies (usually SMEs) related to tourism, able to
develop new solutions, create new products, and provide services with high
added value. Concerning research, today we are very far from supporting a
sustainable tourism economy.
Sustainability (not just environmental) is the
effect of a number of causes. To achieve the desired result of building a sustainable
tourism destination, a powerful lever is available to be used: responsible
tourism will lead to sustainable tourism.
Responsible tourism, as opposed to the predator
mass tourism – clearly and fortunately in decline - is one which is well aware of
its impacts on the local environment, respecting and promoting the greatest benefit
for it (for local stakeholders). Only a question as a provocative example: does
the "all inclusive" model respond to this concept?
The wave of Corporate Social Responsibility has
also come to tourism, as demonstrated in the Madrid Declaration of April 2010
("Towards a Socially Responsible Tourism Model": http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/tourism/files/madrid_stakeholders_conference/declaration_madrid_en.pdf) , developed in the framework of
the Spanish Presidency of the European Union. It states that: “Corporate Social
Responsibility is essential in the tourist industry and should be therefore
taken into consideration in tourism activities and practices at destination,
enterprise and tourist level. The raising of public awareness and promotion of
responsible attitudes of European tourists is also essential in order to
increase the demand for responsible tourist products and services in Europe.”
This is the new wave, which, in my view, is
here to stay. As stated from the findings of that statement, “The Member States
declare their willingness…To promote responsible and ethical tourism and,
especially, social, environmental, cultural and economic sustainability of
tourism”. I’d add that to move in this direction there is something as basic as
the awareness and education of the local people.
Together with sustainability, accessibility is
another concept closely related to stewardship, when talking about tourism. The
aim is to increase the participation of people with disabilities in the tourism
phenomenon, based on a fundamental principle of fairness and respect for the
rights of these citizens with special needs.
To make progress in this field, it is relevant
to consider:
-Actions to prevent discrimination against this
group (large and heterogeneous), from the above mentioned “umbrella” of Corporate
Social Responsibility.
-The consideration of this segment of potential
customers as a business opportunity for the tourism industry, based on the
figures corresponding to its size in Spain and Europe, as well as the
demographic trend towards an increasingly aging population, whose substantial
growth will rise the attractiveness of this niche, at least with respect to the
people with reduced mobility.
The estimated data (taken from the Tourist
Accessibility Plan of Spain) tell that:
-3.5 million people suffer some form of
physical disability (disabled) in Spain, 50 million in the European Union, 600
million worldwide.
-In Europe, demand for potential tourists with
disabilities stands at 127 million people, not counting those who accompany
them, since many of these people cannot travel alone. However, a European
potential market of 133 million tourists may represent a yearly income estimated
at 80 billion euros.
-Disability is not such an exceptional
phenomenon in our society: the current ratio of people with disabilities in
Spain is 9%, that is, nearly one in ten Spaniards.
In parallel:
-There are still many people with disabilities wanting
and being able to financially afford traveling and, however, do not do it, or
do it less often than they would like, due to the barriers found in
transportations and tourist destinations.
-Major obstacles also remain for these people
to find a job, either by inaccessibility of the workplace, by a misperception
about their possible performance or by breaching the law.
Nevertheless, although the road ahead is still
long, significant steps forward have been done with regard to the rights of
these people. For instance, some standards or certifications have been launched,
such as DISCERT (the European Certificate that recognizes companies and
organizations committed with disabled persons) or UNE 170001 for global or
universal accessibility.
To sum up, we should learn that accessibility
must be integrated as a component of the broad and complex concept of tourism
excellence: there is no excellence without full accessibility. Accessibility
means quality and safety for everyone, not just for disabled people. It must
be, then, in any tourism development strategy. And this requires education,
awareness, information, training to break prejudices and unfounded stereotypes.
These issues (sustainability and accessibility
in tourism) have to be part of the Stewardship agenda.
The world evolves pushed by large vectors of
change, whether political, economic, social or technological. The green, the
sustainable, is one of those vectors that, of course, affects tourism in all
its aspects: its momentum requires political and business decisions; it has noticeable
economic implications, becoming a segment increasingly attractive; this market
responds to an increasingly widespread and entrenched social demand, which
values that profile while claims the necessary investments to public and private actors;
technological advancements further strengthen this positioning, with the
development of technologies that enable an increasingly efficient use of
resources (water, energy) and minimize the impact on the environment
(recycling, reducing carbon footprint, etc.).
The event “Green innovation in tourism " (Rio
de Janeiro [Brazil] , June 19, 2012) held in the context of the Rio +20 meeting
, emphasized that changes in tourism practices can lead to significant benefits
towards greater sustainability within the supply chain. Communications showed that
pay more attention to sustainability, particularly green innovation, can lead
to the creation of more jobs and the reduction of environmental impacts and
their costs, increasing the competitive advantage of companies and
destinations, while enhancing the visitor experience.
Despite the significant progress made,
innovation continues to face obstacles, including lack of awareness of
tourists, many of whom are reluctant to pay a higher price for sustainable
holidays, lack of information from companies on the costs of investment,
limited access to finance by micro and medium-sized enterprises, or lack of
political integration among key sectors such as tourism, transport, energy and
the environment.
Alain Dupeyras, Head of Tourism Program of the OECD’s
Centre for Entrepreneurship, SMEs and Local Development, said in that event:
"A more strategic approach in promoting green innovation in tourism will
require greater horizontal and vertical policy coordination, by example,
improving access to the necessary financing to small and medium enterprises to
cover their efforts in the field of green innovation".
I went back to this issue because is an
intrinsic value of what has been recently called “Smart Tourism Destinations”.
3.-FINAL CONCLUSION
The stewardship spirit can be conceptualize as
a driver to achieve a higher level of sustainability both in companies or other
kind of organizations (because of its mechanisms to promote collaboration among
diverse stakeholders and individuals) and in the society in general.
We should remember that since the 1980s,
sustainability has been used more in the sense of human sustainability on
planet Earth and this has resulted in the most widely quoted definition taken
from the Brundtland Commission of the United Nations on March 20, 1987:
“sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
In a more and more global and complex economy
and society in general, because of the diversity of interests in conflict, we
are convinced that this spirit of stewardship is increasingly necessary and
will expand. I see this effort as part of the development of a new (and
general) strategic theory, able to deal with the new challenges of the 21st
century. This search for a new strategic approach is a multidisciplinary
attempt, trying to go beyond the economics-and-business focus that has been
dominant till now.
In fact, Strategic Management has revealed the
importance of context and social structure, the relevance of interactions and
the complexity of human behaviours in organizations (personal relationships,
cognitive biases, emotional and psychological issues). To face this challenge,
the stewardship approach has a significant role to be played.
As a last observation, I want to emphasize the
urgent need to recover the centrality of human factor as a social being. Given
the current context of a deep crisis, this means the recovery of some values
banished by the dominant economic paradigms in recent decades: managers with
awareness on the importance of an ethical behaviour, together with excellent
technical competences. In a nutshell, rethinking how to conduct an economy and
its companies to emerge stronger from the crisis, with more accountable and
steward leaders.
---
Published on 15/03/14 in: http://www.stewardship.it/3600/#.UySMi9hOXtS
[1] There are a lot of ethics, being usually
controversial because of the cultural/religious connotations of this word.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario