More Than Just "Greenwashing": Navigating CSR, ESG, and Perceived Organizational Publicness (PPS) for Financial and Social Outcomes

Introduction: Navigating the Evolving Management Landscape

In today's business world, expectations for organizations extend far beyond the bottom line. The public, employees, investors, and various regulators demand transparency, accountability, and a positive contribution to society and the environment. This paradigm shift requires leaders to adopt innovative management approaches that integrate social and ethical values into the core of their business operations.

The central challenge for managers is to understand and implement the various approaches that have evolved over the years. While they might seem similar, they hold significant differences that impact strategy and performance. The sheer number of concepts and frameworks—from "Corporate Social Responsibility" (CSR) to "Conscious Capitalism"—can be confusing, making it difficult to choose the most suitable approach for a given organization. This is especially true with the emergence of innovative concepts like "Perceived Organizational Publicness" (PPS), which demands clarity regarding its unique contribution and how it differs from its older counterparts.

In this article, we'll dive deep into four key concepts shaping the modern management world: Organizational Publicness (including its structural and perceived aspects), Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance), and Conscious Capitalism. We'll examine what each approach entails, the "pain points" it aims to address, what research has found in the field, and the practical tools it offers. Finally, we'll analyze how these approaches complement or potentially clash with each other, providing actionable recommendations for managers and organizational consultants. Our aim is to offer leaders a practical "guidebook" for informed decision-making, enabling them to not only meet evolving expectations but also leverage social and environmental responsibility as a driver for growth, innovation, and sustainable competitive advantage.

Modern Approaches to Organizational Management: Theoretical and Practical Foundations

The changing landscape of organizational management increasingly requires public, hybrid, and business organizations to consider their broader societal impact beyond mere financial performance. This demand has led to a wide range of theories and approaches aimed at integrating social, environmental, and ethical considerations into core business practices. The historical evolution of these approaches, from early philanthropic initiatives to focused investment decision frameworks, points to a fundamental shift in societal expectations for organizations. Today, organizations are not just expected to generate profits but also to demonstrate social and environmental responsibility, thereby earning a "social license to operate" granted, in essence—even if not formally—by the public.

1. Organizational Publicness: Why All Organizations Are Public?

Let's start at the roots with a broader understanding of "publicness." When we talk about organizational publicness, we're referring to the extent to which an organization is influenced by two primary and often opposing forces: the political system (regulation) and market influence (economics). You can think of the tension between them as a spectrum, not a binary choice of "public" or "private"; every organization finds its operational tension somewhere on this continuum.

Traditionally, the distinction between public and private organizations was determined by "hard" characteristics like ownership (is it government-owned?), funding (where does the money come from – taxes or sales?), and control (is it politically driven or market-driven?). However, Professor Barry Bozeman, a pioneer in the field, introduced a dimensional model of publicness, arguing that no organization is entirely "private" or "public." He famously stated that "All Organizations Are Public!" This is a far-reaching insight. Why? Because political authority influences behavior and processes in all organizations, not just those government-owned. Even private organizations, by their very nature, are influenced to varying degrees by political authority, for example, through government funding, strict regulation, or public oversight. The public, in essence, grants organizations a "social license to operate," and it expects them to meet a "public" standard, beyond merely purchasing a product or service. For instance, a private pharmaceutical company, while profit-driven, is subject to stringent government regulation ensuring public safety. When it receives government funding for vaccine development, it's expected to demonstrate transparency and accountability to the broader public, much like a government agency.

The development of publicness theory has expanded beyond objective characteristics to also include normative aspects of "public values." This means publicness isn't just a matter of legal or organizational definition, but also one of commitment to the common good, social values, and public service. Later, the definition of publicness was further broadened to encompass "the extent to which an organization is attuned to public needs." In other words, how much an organization is responsive to values like fairness, transparency, accountability, and legal compliance. This definition moves beyond "dry" structures and emphasizes the core values an organization embodies.

Organizational publicness theory aims to address several "pain points" and managerial dilemmas. It helps in understanding the complexity of "hybrid" organizations, which are neither purely public nor purely private, such as government-owned companies or non-profits receiving government funding. It allows managers to grasp their unique characteristics and the inherent tensions between economic and public goals. Additionally, it tackles the challenge of multiple accountabilities—public organizations, and even private organizations with high publicness, must answer to numerous stakeholders like government, the public, regulators, and investors.

Understanding the dimension of publicness helps managers navigate this labyrinth. The theory also sheds light on the influence of publicness on efficiency and performance; studies have shown that publicness can affect organizational outputs and the level of bureaucracy. Understanding this dimension helps managers comprehend why certain organizations behave in specific ways and find methods to improve performance even within publicness constraints.

Organizational publicness isn't a voluntary management "action plan" like some other approaches; it's a fundamental characteristic of an organization. Understanding it allows managers to navigate complexity, grasp the tensions between economic, social, and regulatory objectives, and enhance performance. Even if an organization is bureaucratic by nature, understanding its origin can help managers find ways to become more efficient and improve service. It also helps leverage "hybridity," as many organizations today are hybrid, and understanding publicness helps managers intelligently combine different governance forms, such as integrating bureaucratic rules with professional autonomy.

Perceived Organizational Publicness (PPS): The Innovation of Individual Perspective

A recent development allows this theory to be applied as a management tool. While traditional organizational publicness describes the "objective" or structural characteristics of an organization (ownership, funding, control), Perceived Organizational Publicness (PPS) takes us a step further: it focuses on stakeholders' individual perceptions of an organization's publicness (e.g., employees, suppliers, or customers). It's not what's written in the bylaws or the law, but what the stakeholder feels and experiences daily.

PPS concerns "the extent to which an organization (any organization, regardless of its ownership) is attuned to public interests," as perceived by its stakeholders. This isn't just a combination of ownership, funding, and political or economic control, but also an integration of public values as reflected in daily experience. For example: Does an employee feel the organization acts legally and fairly towards everyone (perceived legality and equality)? Does the organization take responsibility for its actions and is accountable (perceived accountability)? And is the organization open and provides information to the public (perceived transparency)?

PPS aims to address "pain points" and dilemmas such as the gap between the "official" and the "experiential": often, an organization can be formally public, but in practice, its employees don't experience it that way. PPS seeks to bridge this gap and examine how publicness "lives" within the organization from the perspective of employees and other stakeholders at various touchpoints in the organization's operating environment. It also helps understand the impact of these perceptions on performance: managers want engaged and committed employees, and PPS helps understand how the perception of organizational publicness influences their engagement and behavior, and how to foster pro-social behaviors—how to get employees to "give of themselves" beyond their job description.

Findings show that perceived organizational publicness is positively linked to "Organizational Citizenship Behaviors" (OCB). These are those pro-social actions we so much want to see in an organization—mutual help, volunteering for extra tasks, improvement initiatives. This link is largely mediated by employee engagement. In other words, when an employee perceives their organization as responsive to the public and characterized by public values, they feel more meaning in their work, which increases their engagement and strengthens their willingness to contribute beyond expectations. PPS offers managers a powerful tool for identifying perceptual gaps through surveys, workshops, and learning processes, for strengthening employee engagement by understanding the level of PPS, and for organizational alignment to reinforce its level or prevent dissonance that could harm job performance. In short: PPS is a new and important lens through which to view the organization. It tells us that the subjective experience of stakeholders is just as important, and perhaps more so, than an organization's formal definition.

2. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is a business model where companies integrate social and environmental concerns into their business operations and interactions with their stakeholders, going beyond purely economic profits. It's a way for a company to balance economic, environmental, and social needs—an approach often called the "Triple Bottom Line."

The roots of CSR run deep, with seeds of social responsibility traceable back to the 18th and 19th centuries, when religious organizations avoided investing in industries that didn't align with their values, and wealthy industrialists engaged in extensive philanthropy. This period laid the groundwork for the idea of businesses contributing to society. In the mid-20th century, the discussion deepened around the "social contract" between business and society—the idea that businesses operate with public consent and therefore have an obligation to serve society's needs. In the 1980s and 90s, CSR became more formalized, and by the 2000s, it went mainstream, with global standards and extensive reporting. In places like India, it even became legally mandated.

The "pain points," dilemmas, and challenges CSR aims to solve stem from companies' desire to avoid negative public criticism and enhance their reputation. Additionally, many consumers and employees prefer socially responsible companies, and CSR helps attract and retain them. Companies also realize that to operate legitimately in society, they must "give back"—this is their "social license to operate." However, there's an accompanying "pain point": a common criticism is that CSR is sometimes an "oxymoron"—an attempt to legitimize capitalism, where "good" actions are bought by the organization at a low price, offering minimal service.

Corporate Social Responsibility evolved from a philanthropic tool (one-time donation) to a strategic one. Managers use it to enhance reputation and build relationships with consumers, communities, suppliers, and stakeholders, as well as to increase differentiation and publicity over competitors. It also helps attract investors and employees who seek values and meaning, and to manage risks—both reputational and regulatory. Examples of practical tools and practices include the regular and transparent publication of corporate social responsibility reports, creating "shared value" initiatives that combine business goals with social solutions (e.g., a food company investing in sustainable agriculture in distressed areas), and integrating CSR into the value chain by ensuring ethical suppliers and fair working conditions throughout the entire production chain. For instance, by printing the picture of the coffee farmer from Brazil, and stating "thank you" for my responsible purchase aiding their livelihood.

3. Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG)

ESG is a newer approach referring to three central factors: Environmental, Social, and Governance. These are the metrics investors use to determine the sustainability and ethical impact of an investment in a company or organization. It's an approach primarily driven by investors, aiming to promote sustainable and ethical growth to achieve both financial returns and positive impact.

The idea of integrating non-financial considerations into investments isn't new. As mentioned, even in the 18th century, religious groups avoided investing in businesses like slavery. But the specific term "ESG" was coined only in 2005 in the "Who Cares Wins" report by the UN Global Compact. In 2006, the UN Principles for Responsible Investment (UNPRI) were launched, calling on institutional investors to integrate ESG considerations. After the 2008 global financial crisis, interest in ESG surged, and today, a significant portion of managed assets is expected to include an ESG mandate.

The "pain points," dilemmas, and challenges ESG aims to solve stem from investors' dilemma—whether to invest in profitable but "dirty" companies, or "good" but less profitable ones. ESG offers a bridge that allows for both. Investors realized that environmental risks (e.g., pollution) and social risks (e.g., ethical scandals) can harm a company's value. ESG provides tools for identifying and managing these risks. Additionally, companies wanted to present themselves as green and responsible, but sometimes without a reliable basis, and ESG provides more objective metrics. The challenge is to prevent companies from misrepresenting ESG activities without real substance, a phenomenon known as "Greenwashing." The demand for quantitative metrics aims to mitigate this.

Adopting an ESG strategy has become crucial for companies seeking to ensure long-term sustainability and growth. The benefits for managers include a competitive advantage and access to capital (many investors now demand ESG metrics), improved brand reputation (being "green" and "responsible" enhances image), attracting and retaining talent (many talented employees prefer values-driven companies), and risk management (identifying and reducing environmental, social, and governance risks). Examples of practical tools and practices include publishing comprehensive ESG reports on a company's performance across environmental, social, and governance dimensions, setting measurable goals (e.g., reducing carbon emissions, increasing gender diversity on the board), and collaborating with rating agencies specializing in ESG ratings to improve their score.

4. Conscious Capitalism

Conscious Capitalism is an economic and political philosophy emphasizing social responsibility. It argues that businesses should operate ethically by serving the interests of all stakeholders, not just management and shareholders. It posits that businesses can achieve financial success by acting responsibly and serving higher moral and social ideals.

The concept was coined and popularized by John Mackey (co-founder of Whole Foods Market) and Raj Sisodia in their book "Conscious Capitalism." It's a movement and business tactic that offers a more sustainable form of capitalism. It doesn't minimize the pursuit of profit but encourages integrating all shared interests into a company's business plan. It's based on four core principles: Higher Purpose (the business serves a deeper purpose than profit, e.g., a shoe company aiming "to change the world one step at a time"), Stakeholder Orientation (creating value for all stakeholders—employees, customers, suppliers, community, environment, investors), Conscious Leadership (leaders who transcend personal interests and are driven by the higher purpose), and Conscious Culture (fostering an environment of trust, accountability, transparency, integrity, and personal growth).

The "pain points," dilemmas, and challenges Conscious Capitalism aims to solve stem from a crisis of trust in capitalism—many have felt "pain" and a sense that modern capitalism is driven solely by profit and harms society and the environment. This philosophy offers an ethical alternative. Additionally, many employees seek meaningful work, and this philosophy helps create it. Conscious Capitalism addresses the perceived conflict between profit and value by asserting that profit is a natural outcome of creating value for all stakeholders, not an exclusive goal.

Conscious Capitalism offers a holistic framework for implementation, and managers who adopt it report better financial performance (studies show that organizations implementing Conscious Capitalism may outperform the market in the long run), high employee engagement (a conscious culture fosters an environment of trust and growth), and innovation and risk management (long-term thinking and "systemic intelligence" allow for early problem identification). Examples of practical tools and practices include defining a clear "Higher Purpose" for the organization, creating stakeholder maps for systematically identifying all stakeholders and creating value for them, developing Conscious Leadership through training managers with systemic thinking and empathy, and fostering a culture of trust and transparency through internal and external openness.

Integrative Analysis: Comparing and Distinguishing the Approaches

We've understood each approach individually. Now, let's see how they intertwine, where they are similar, and where they fundamentally differ.

Points of Similarity: We All Want a Better World (One Way or Another)

All four approaches acknowledge and promote organizational considerations that extend beyond maximizing shareholder profits. They all understand that organizations have a broader responsibility towards society and the environment, moving away from a narrow economic focus. All of them, to varying degrees, emphasize the importance of considering multiple stakeholders (employees, customers, communities, environment, investors) in organizational decision-making. Despite their differing mechanisms, all are rooted in the fundamental belief that organizations should operate ethically, transparently, and contribute positively to societal well-being.

Key Differences: From "Obligation" to "Choice" and "Perception"

The differences between the approaches present them as existing on a spectrum of organizational involvement with social concerns.

Traditional/Structural Organizational Publicness represents the most ingrained and structural form of public accountability. It's about "being" public—meaning, it deals with the organization's structural characteristics like government ownership, public funding, or inherent subordination to political regulation. This is often an obligation or an inherent given, not a voluntary choice. It arises from the organization's nature and identity. The unique "pain point" or challenge here lies in inherent tensions between conflicting goals (profit versus social benefit), bureaucracy, multiple accountabilities, and public policy objectives that are an integral part of the organizational DNA.

Perceived Organizational Publicness (PPS) is a unique lens focused on the subjective perception of the employee (or any stakeholder) regarding the organization's publicness, including value-based aspects like legality, equality, transparency, and accountability. It stems from structural publicness but adds the emotional and experiential dimension of the employee. It doesn't just describe the organization but examines how it's experienced and impacts employee behavior. The unique "pain point" or challenge here is the gaps between the "official" and the "experiential" within the organization, and their implications for employee engagement and job performance, especially when publicness perception clashes with the goals of a private organization (value dissonance).

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is a voluntary operational choice driven by ethical and strategic considerations. Companies choose to undertake "good" actions (philanthropy, social initiatives, pollution reduction) to improve reputation, attract customers and employees, and manage risks. It's about "acting" publicly or ethically. The unique "pain point" or challenge here is public skepticism (Greenwashing) and the need to prove that initiatives are authentic and integrated into the core business, not just "image polishing."

ESG is primarily an external and quantifiable evaluation tool, mainly designed for financial markets and driven by investors. It focuses on specific and proven metrics of environmental, social, and governance performance, aiming to guide investment decisions. The unique "pain point" or challenge here is the need for accurate and reliable data, standardization of metrics, and avoiding "greenwashing" in the investment sphere.

Conscious Capitalism represents a deep internal philosophical shift that redefines the very essence of the business and its purpose beyond profit, toward serving all stakeholders and human flourishing. It's a holistic philosophy that dictates the organization's DNA. The unique "pain point" or challenge here is the demand for deep commitment from management and employees, a fundamental cultural change, and a very long-term perspective, which doesn't always align with short-term market pressures.

Complementary or Conflicting? Usually Complementary!

It's important to understand that these approaches are not mutually exclusive; in fact, they usually complement each other and lead to synergistic effects. For example, a company implementing Conscious Capitalism (a deep philosophy) may naturally achieve high ESG scores and implement strong CSR initiatives, because it creates value for all stakeholders and is focused on a higher purpose. Organizations with high inherent organizational publicness (e.g., a government company) may adopt CSR and ESG practices to enhance their legitimacy, efficiency, and meet public expectations and regulatory requirements, thereby also improving perceived publicness among their employees. Understanding perceived publicness can help managers across all types of organizations identify and nurture those public values that boost employee engagement and lead to pro-social behaviors, even in private organizations that adopt CSR, ESG, or Conscious Capitalism approaches.

This analysis suggests a dynamic relationship where one approach can reinforce or necessitate another, rather than existing in isolation, ultimately contributing to a more comprehensive framework of responsible management.

Conclusion and Insights: A Guidebook for Managers and Organizational Consultants

In conclusion, while organizational publicness in its two forms, Corporate Social Responsibility, ESG, and Conscious Capitalism all address an organization's role in society, they do so from different perspectives.

Organizational publicness defines an organization's inherent nature and structural accountability due to its connections to political authority and public sector values. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) focuses on voluntary business practices that integrate social and environmental considerations into operations. ESG provides an investor-driven framework for evaluating a company's sustainability and ethical performance. Conscious Capitalism represents a holistic business philosophy that redefines the business's purpose to serve all stakeholders and the greater good.

These approaches are not mutually exclusive; in fact, they often complement each other and lead to synergistic effects, reflecting a broader societal trend towards more responsible and accountable organizational behavior, driven by diverse forces—from inherent mandates to market pressures and research insights.

The growing emphasis and differentiation of these management approaches reflect increasing maturity in the discourse surrounding organizational responsibility. The shift from general ethical appeals to structured, measurable, and even perceived forms of accountability by various stakeholders enables more targeted and effective strategies in addressing complex social challenges. In general, these developments allow for more precise analysis and implementation of tailored management principles, ultimately fostering a more comprehensive approach to organizational impact.

It seems the future of managerial success in organizations will increasingly be measured not only by financial metrics but by a holistic assessment of their impact on society, the environment, and their adherence to public values, requiring a nuanced understanding and integrated application of diverse, yet interconnected, management concepts.

Perceived Organizational Publicness (PPS): A Catalyst for Bottom-Up Change

Yet, within this set of approaches, Perceived Organizational Publicness (PPS) stands out as an innovative, relevant, and uniquely valuable approach. While CSR and ESG are sometimes seen as "top-down" initiatives or control and oversight tools driven by external factors (investors, regulators), and Conscious Capitalism requires a deep philosophical shift of the entire organization, mainly also "top-down," PPS offers a way to drive significant bottom-up change processes.

It focuses on shifting perceptions at the individual level—the employee. When employees perceive their organization as public-minded, fair, transparent, and accountable, it directly impacts their motivation, engagement, and willingness to contribute beyond what's required (Organizational Citizenship Behaviors - OCB). This ability to influence management perceptions and optimize internal and external organizational interfaces makes PPS a powerful tool for managers seeking to effect real and sustainable change. It allows managers not only to set goals but also to understand and shape employees' internal experience, so they become active ambassadors and agents of change for the organization's values and public responsibility. Thus, PPS is not just a theoretical model, but a concept with the potential to serve as a significant catalyst for successful change leadership, complementing the other approaches and giving them internal depth and meaning.

Measuring the Success of "Perceived Organizational Publicness": Beyond Formal Definitions

Measuring the success of implementing "Perceived Organizational Publicness" (PPS) requires evaluating both the extent of the perception itself and the results derived from it. As mentioned, current theory suggests that "virtually all organizations are public" to some degree, as political authority influences all of them, not just government entities. Therefore, measuring PPS is relevant for a wide range of organizations—private, public, and hybrid alike.

The primary tool for measuring perceived publicness is the "Publicness Perceptions Scale" (PPS). This scale examines how employees (and broader stakeholders) perceive their organization's publicness across several dimensions. These include perceptions regarding public ownership and funding, market control, legality and equality, and organizational accountability and transparency. This measurement is typically done through surveys and questionnaires administered to employees, providing a comprehensive snapshot of the perceived publicness within the organization.

The success of PPS implementation isn't just about the existence of perceptions but also their impact on organizational behavior and tangible outcomes. It's manifested in increased Organizational Citizenship Behaviors (OCB), higher employee engagement, creation of public value, and improved satisfaction among customers, citizens, and stakeholders.

The Role of Regulation and Government Policy in Encouraging or Enforcing These Approaches

Regulation and government policy play a crucial role in shaping the landscape of organizational responsibility. Beyond the inherent influence of regulation on public organizations, governments can encourage the adoption of CSR and ESG in the private sector through various incentives, such as tax benefits for companies that report on sustainability, subsidies for green technologies, or preferential treatment in government tenders for companies with high ESG ratings. Conversely, they can also enforce certain standards through mandatory legislation, such as environmental protection laws, fair labor regulations, or transparency reporting requirements. For example, laws requiring large companies to publish sustainability reports or regulations concerning gender diversity on boards push organizations to adopt ESG principles more structurally. This role of government is essential in creating a level playing field and ensuring a minimum level of social and environmental accountability.

How to Combat Greenwashing and "Social Washing"

These terms describe a situation where organizations present a false impression of environmentally or socially responsible activity, without substantial underlying basis in their operations. These phenomena threaten public trust and the legitimacy of approaches like CSR and ESG. Addressing this challenge requires a combination of transparency, external verification and validation, and public scrutiny. Organizations must publish comprehensive, detailed, and independently verified reports that present quantitative and qualitative data on their environmental and social performance. Investors and consumers should be critical and demand concrete evidence for organizations' claims. Additionally, regulators can impose fines for misleading practices, and civil society organizations can act as "watchdogs" to expose instances of greenwashing or social washing. Strengthening perceived publicness among employees can also help, as employees who believe in the organization's values will be less willing to participate in misleading activities.

However, all these are no substitute for authentic leadership that does not view the organization merely as an engine for economic growth, but is committed to also promoting the public good through it, all with the understanding that precisely this approach is likely to yield long-term economic and social benefits.

Summary Table: Addressing Core Questions

Core Question	Organizational Publicness	Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)	ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance)	Conscious Capitalism
What is the approach and its validity?	The extent of political authority vs. market influence on an organization (all organizations are public to some degree). Innovation: Dimensional understanding, includes values and employee perception (PPS).	A business model for integrating social and environmental considerations into the core. Innovation: Shift from philanthropy to structured business strategy.	A framework for investors to evaluate sustainability and ethical impact (Environment, Social, Governance). Innovation: Integrates non-financial considerations for positive return and impact.	A philosophy emphasizing serving the interests of all stakeholders and higher ethical goals. Innovation: Redefining business purpose beyond profit, driven by values.
How does it differ from similar concepts?	An inherent/given organizational characteristic, influenced by ownership, funding, and political control, committed to public values. PPS focuses on employee perception and influences internal behavior.	A voluntary strategic choice for organizations; aims to improve reputation, attract customers/employees, and manage reputational risks.	An investor-focused evaluation tool for quantifying environmental, social, and governance performance; aims to guide investment decisions and risk prevention.	A holistic business philosophy that changes the organizational DNA; deep internal motivation that directs all activities towards creating value for all stakeholders.
What are the practical implications for managers?	Requires understanding tensions between goals (profit vs. publicness), navigating "hybrid" complexity, and managing increased accountability. PPS enables identifying perceptual gaps and strengthening employee engagement (OCB).	Developing social and environmental initiatives, publishing transparency reports, embedding responsibility in the value chain, improving reputation, and gaining competitive advantage.	Collecting ESG data and reporting, setting measurable goals, collaborating with ESG rating agencies, ensuring access to capital, and managing risks.	Defining a "Higher Purpose," creating value for all stakeholders, developing conscious leadership and culture, and building a business with "soul" that generates profit through meaning.

Key Insights for Managers and Organizational Consultants

Understanding these four approaches and how they converge is vital for modern leaders.

Here are some key insights for practical implementation:

• Know Your Organizational DNA: Make sure you understand your organization's publicness dimension—is it inherently "public" (a government company, non-profit), "hybrid," or entirely private? This understanding will influence priorities, challenges, and opportunities. A manager in a "public" organization will need to navigate tensions between economic and public goals, while a manager in a private organization will need to earn a "social license to operate" through voluntary means.

  
  

• Listen to Employee Perceptions (and Quantify Them): Don't settle for formal definitions. Use tools like the PPS scale to measure how employees perceive publicness, transparency, and accountability within the organization. Gaps between the official and the perceived hurt engagement. Measure Organizational Citizenship Behaviors (OCB), as they are a clear sign of engaged, values-driven employees.

  
  

• Social Responsibility as a "License to Operate" and Competitive Advantage: CSR is no longer just philanthropy; it's a strategic tool. Invest in "shared value" initiatives and supply chain transparency. This will enhance your reputation, attract customers and employees, and help manage risks.

  
  

• ESG – A Bridge to the Financial World: If you're seeking access to capital or want to enhance your company's value in the eyes of investors, adopting ESG metrics is essential. Focus on accurate data, set quantitative goals, and consider collaborating with rating agencies. Avoid "Greenwashing"—present things as they truly are.

  
  

• Cultivate a Culture of Conscious Capitalism: This is a long-term investment in your organization's DNA. Define a Higher Purpose that goes beyond profit, create value for all stakeholders, and develop Conscious Leadership driven by values. Organizations that embed Conscious Capitalism often show better financial performance and achieve higher innovation.

  
  

• Combat "Washing" Through Transparency and Verification: Whether it's "Greenwashing" or "Social Washing," the way to combat it is through detailed and externally verified reports, active public scrutiny, and demanding concrete evidence of activities. Employees with high PPS will serve as an internal vaccine against misleading practices.

  
  

• Leverage Regulation and Government Incentives: The government is a significant player. Be aware of existing regulations and incentives (tax benefits, subsidies) that encourage responsible behavior. Use them to benefit your organization and society.

Intelligent and integrated application of these approaches will enable leaders to successfully navigate the changing business landscape, turn challenges into opportunities, and build organizations that are not only profitable but also have a positive and lasting impact.

We're excited to hear from you! Reach out to us and let's discover the perfect options to propel your organization forward!

Discovery session

30

Book Now

References

• Bozeman, B. (1987). All organizations are public: Bridging public and private organizational theories. Jossey-Bass.

• Bozeman, B. (2007). Public values and public interest: Counterbalancing economic individualism. Georgetown University Press.

• Bozeman, B., & Bretschneider, S. (1994). The “Publicness Puzzle” in Organization Theory: A Test of Alternative Explanations of Differences Between Public and Private Organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 4(2), 197–224.

• Bozeman, B., & Moulton, S. (2011). Publicness: A conceptual framework for public management strategy and performance. Stanford University Press.

• Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48.

• Dryzin-Amit, Y., Vashdi, D. R., & Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2022). The publicness enigma: Can perceived publicness predict employees' formal and prosocial behavior across sectors?. PLoS ONE, 17(1), e0262253.

• Goodsell, C. T. (2017). Publicness. Public Administration Review, 77(1), 14–22.

• Haque, M. S. (2001). The diminishing publicness of public service under the New Public Management. Public Administration Review, 61(1), 65–82.

• Mackey, J., & Sisodia, R. (2014). Conscious Capitalism: Liberating the heroic spirit of business. Harvard Business Review Press.

Leading Professional Websites for Further Reading

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR):

• BSR (Business for Social Responsibility): https://www.bsr.org/ - A global non-profit organization working with companies to build a just and sustainable world.

• CSR Europe: https://www.csreurope.org/ - The leading European business network for CSR.

• Boston College Center for Corporate Citizenship: https://www.bc.edu/bc-web/schools/carroll-school/centers/ccc.html - Focuses on aligning corporate citizenship goals with business objectives.

• ACCP (Association of Corporate Citizenship Professionals): https://accp.org/ - A professional organization for corporate citizenship executives.

ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance):

• US SIF (The Forum for Sustainable and Responsible Investment): https://www.ussif.org/ - The leading voice for advancing sustainable investing in the U.S.

• ESG Professionals Network: https://www.esgprofessionalsnetwork.com/ - A professional network for ESG experts.

• The Journal of ESG Investing: https://www.esginvesting.co.uk/the-journal-of-esg-investing/ - A quarterly journal covering radical and reformist initiatives in global financial markets.

Conscious Capitalism:

• Conscious Capitalism International: https://www.consciouscapitalism.org/ - A non-profit organization promoting the philosophy of Conscious Capitalism.

• Conscious Business Collaborative: https://consciousbusinesscollaborative.org/about-us - An organization promoting conscious businesses through education, inspiration, and collaboration.

Organizational Publicness:

• American Society for Public Administration (ASPA): https://www.aspanet.org/ - A leading professional organization in public administration, centralizing research and discussion on publicness issues.

• Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory (JPART): https://academic.oup.com/jpart - A leading academic journal publishing research on organizational publicness.

• Public Administration Review (PAR): https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/15406210 - A highly influential journal in the field of public administration.

• Organization Studies: https://journals.sagepub.com/home/oss - A leading journal in the field of organization studies.

About Dr. Yinon Dryzin-Amit

Dr. Yinon Dryzin-Amit is an expert in organizational and leadership development, driven by a deep passion for fostering thriving and resilient organizations, coupled with a profound sensitivity to human needs. He possesses the unique ability to translate innovative behavioral science research into strategic and practical solutions across diverse sectors.

As the founder of PublicWise, a consulting firm, he is committed to enhancing organizational performance and legitimacy through evidence-based methodologies, with a special focus on "Organizational Publicness" theory.

Previously, Dr. Dryzin-Amit served as Deputy Director General for Systemic Organizational Development in the Israeli Judiciary, where he spearheaded initiatives for systemic change, cultivated organizational resilience, and designed strategic leadership development programs for judges and senior administrative staff. His experience also includes significant contributions to the healthcare system (Clalit Health Services) and the defense sector (Behavioral Sciences Branch of the IDF Navy), where he consulted on organizational and managerial development, employee engagement, and process improvement.

Currently, he shares his expertise as a lecturer at the University of Haifa, in the Department of Sociology and the School of Public Management and Policy.

His research focuses on management, innovation, and the ecology of resilience in complex systems, reflecting his commitment to actionable insights. His publications include:

• "Unveiling the Spirit of Publicness: Conceptualization and Validation of a Publicness Perceptions Scale" (Dryzin-Amit, Vashdi, & Vigoda-Gadot, 2024)

• "The Publicness Enigma: Can Perceived Publicness Predict Employees’ Formal and Prosocial Behavior Across Sectors?" (Dryzin-Amit, Vashdi, & Vigoda-Gadot, 2022)

• "Beyond Individual Grit: A Multi-Level Framework for Systemic Judicial Resilience" (forthcoming, Dryzin-Amit, 2025).