Sustainability and Capability Building in Organizations: A Focused Group Approach

Introduction

The increasing awareness about sustainable development has led to a surge in sustainability literature (Abulibdeh et al., 2024; Rao et al., 2022). Since the adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), organizations have started to focus on the planet, people and the environment with the belief that it will lead to better business performance for the firm. Thus, the relationship between sustainability practices and the business performance of companies has attracted much attention from researchers (Shah et al., 2024). Following a recent review, authors Rao et al. (2022) identified eight business areas resembling tremendous growth opportunities through sustainable business practices (SBPs) in the future. On the business front, several businesses are tackling sustainability in their own way. Not too long ago, global consumer electronics giant Apple Inc. decided to no longer include wall chargers and earbuds in its new iPhone 12 boxes. These moves may save the company money, but just how good it will be for the planet is something that is harder to visualize (New York Times, 2024). Similarly, worldwide economic developments have led to a substantial increase in the rapid exploitation of natural resources and of the planet, causing global imbalances and unsustainability. Thus, it is vital to address the environmental, social and governance (ESG) components of existing business practices.

Sustainability in business has been defined in dynamic ways, covering diverse components of business and sustainability. The World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED, 1987) describes it as ‘development that meets the desires of the past generation without compromising future generations to satisfy their needs by knowing the scarcity of natural resources’, Schaltegger et al. (2012) defined it as ‘a voluntary activity to contribute to the societal and environmental problem by creating profits’. Similarly, hundreds of definitions were coined later in academic debates and business arenas (Arena et al., 2009). However, a golden thread that weaved together all definitions referred to sustainability as a more transparent, more ethical and more humane way of doing business. Seeking a forward-looking perspective, it appears that a profound paradigm shift is required, concerned with what is to be called SBPs in these uncertain, dynamic and unexpected business landscapes. However, across existing studies, what is missing is a careful analysis and scrutiny of the theoretical approaches to understanding SBPs. More specifically, understanding the theories that enable predictions about why, when and how specific capabilities can be developed to render SBPs for future-ready organizations. Not only is there a need to rethink the human capabilities to learn, but there is also an emerging need to reinvent workforce experience (Johnston & Samanta, 2024), dynamics (Fyhn et al., 2023) and diversity (Sukalov), and to enhance efficiency and reconsider how to develop future leaders (Raut et al., 2024). Thus, despite the anticipated growth and widespread acknowledgement of sustainable practices (Visvizi et al., 2018), a crucial gap remains in understanding how such practices can be practically implemented across different sectors and how they genuinely impact business performance. Therefore, the present study aims to fill this gap by exploring the integration and effectiveness of these practices amidst varying organizational strategies.

Sustainability in business is a continuous learning process yielding bi-directional benefits to societies and businesses alike. However, how conscious businesses today are to adapt to inclusive strategies and incubate suitability and capability enrichment is a pertinent and debatable question. In this line of thought, several companies have been forced to reassess their old organizational structure due to the changing market demands, fluctuating client expectations, environmental challenges and limited economic profits in numerous industries (Magnusson & Werner, 2023). Therefore, it is vital to address the social, environmental and economic components of manufacturing methods due to the government policies and societal and customer pressure. To achieve these sustainability goals, industries are turning to modern technologies such as blockchain, big data analytics, cyber-physical systems, cloud computing and the circular economy (CE). These technologies represent critical tools for advancing Industry 4.0, offering potential solutions to sustainability challenges in manufacturing and healthcare sectors (Mehrotra & Jaladi, 2022). These alternatives arose as a response to the need for sustainability in the manufacturing and supply chain industries (Dharmayanti et al., 2023). All these emerging technologies are referred to as critical technologies for Industry 4.0 or the fourth Industrial Revolution (Abulibdeh et al., 2024). This study is motivated by the observation that despite widespread acknowledgement of the importance of sustainability, the integration and effectiveness of sustainable practices vary significantly among organizations, necessitating a focused analysis of the enabling factors and barriers.

Therefore, the main objective of this study is to explore the reasons, effects and challenges in managing inclusive business sustainability and comprehensive capability enhancement. Through focused group discussions, this research will document the experiences of business managers, practitioners and policymakers, providing actionable insights into the integration and effectiveness of sustainable practices. By examining the real-world applications and challenges of SBPs in various industries, this research aims to contribute valuable insights to the ongoing academic discourse and offer practical guidance for organizations striving to enhance their sustainability efforts.

The article is structured as follows: The second section illustrates the literature review followed by the research methodology in the third section. Results and discussions have been presented in the fourth section and the study is finally concluded in the fifth section.

Literature Review

Amidst global challenges, notably the COVID-19 pandemic, the focus on SBPs has intensified, marking a critical area of research. The world saw resonance effects, turmoil and demand and supply ripples spread across international networks (Guan et al., 2020). These challenges underscore the urgent need for firms to adopt robust sustainable practices that can mitigate the impacts of such global disruptions and ensure long-term viability. The uncertainty brought an unprecedented opportunity for businesses to embed sustainability in the different aspects of firm operations and to adopt a strategic approach to business management. As businesses navigate these disruptions, it becomes imperative to explore how established research has connected sustainable practices with strategic business objectives and overall firm performance.

Capability Building

Amid rising natural disasters, pandemics, equipment failure, and so on, the importance of building resilience in an organization for surviving, adapting and growing in an uncertain environment has increased (Oeij et al., 2017). Building organizational capability is a strategic investment (Raut et al., 2023) since it is the ability to get its people and other resources together to proactively respond to changes in the business environment, and deliver value to its customers and stakeholders, and secure its long-term growth (Jämsä et al., 2011). There are some difficult-to-replicate capabilities in an enterprise, and these can be considered as precursors to firm-level success (Teece et al., 1997). Organizations that are flexible and can present a timely respond to changing environments can gain sustainable advantage. In the literature, there is evidence of different types of capabilities; researchers try to identify them as zero-, first- and second-order capabilities (Zollo & Winter, 2002), while other classifications use different terminology such as ordinary or dynamic capabilities. Over the years, organizations have shifted their focus from just looking at ordinary capabilities—best practices, and technical and operational efficiency (Teece, 2014). Even signature processes and activities need a revamp over time because they have become imitable (Dangi et al., 2020; Laaksonen & Peltoniemi, 2018). Specific routines such as resource allocation, alliance, acquisition, knowledge creation, product development and so on (Eisenhardt & Martin, 2000) are considered to be repetitive patterns of activity (Nelson, 1985), and these patterns are considered as different for stable and high-velocity conditions. Hence it is vital that ‘the organizational and strategic routines by which firms achieve new resource configurations as markets emerge, collide, split, evolve and die’ (Eisenhardt & Martin, 2000, p. 1107). These capability-building leveraged resources have also been called dynamic or second-order capabilities. In other words, dynamic capabilities refer to the capacity to extract rents from current resources as well as build new competencies (Teece et al., 1997). Deploying dynamic capabilities thus involves both capability exploitation and capability building (Tallman, 2015). While capability exploitation concerns the extent to which a firm exploits rent-generating resources, capability building involves the extent to which a firm commits to building new capabilities through learning from other organizations, creating new skills or revitalizing existing skills in new situations. Both are important in today’s turbulent business environment. Capability exploitation is critical for gaining competitive advantages and determining strategies for exploiting such advantages (Cantwell, 2014). Capability building ensures the growth of sustainable advantages and generates new bundles of resources. Collectively, capabilities determine an enterprise’s ability to create and use organizationally embedded resources in the pursuit of a sustained competitive advantage in a global marketplace. The Porter Report (Porter & Ketels, 2003) focuses on innovative capabilities, and it highlights that networking translates into innovative outcomes and that inter-organizational networking is prime for the development of innovative capability. According to the logic of dynamic capability leverage, this innovation capability is about both the generation and the exploitation of new products, services, processes and business practices (Pittaway et al., 2004)

In the context of very dynamic markets, the logic of leverage and its relevance regarding strategic conduct has been questioned, hence the need for understanding how organizations can develop capabilities to explore, exploit and capture market opportunities and relentless innovations with speed and surprise as an important imperative for organizational success for a more sustainable future (Christensen, 1997). Specifically, post-COVID-19, businesses need to rethink the capabilities building of their employees to make them prepared for future turbulences in the business environment. According to McKinsey and Company Report 2020, capability building has gained more attention than the pre-COVID-19 business environment. Higher value is placed on providing knowledge enhancement, skill development and capability building.

It is critical to examine the demands, roles and results of SCPs. From an environmental and social standpoint, sustainability progress is being accomplished, but it is gradual, intermittent, narrow and prone to unsustainable behaviours. Table 1 highlights research articles published in 2021 and 2020 on the SBPs, using the keywords ‘Sustainable Business Practices’, ‘Capability Building’ and ‘COVID-19’. The articles were sorted by recency and relevancy, and the top eight pieces of research, and their results have been summarized in Table 1.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Summary of Recent Research Articles on Sustainable Business Practices.

Authors and Year	Journal	Purpose	Findings	Methodology
Prasanna et al. (2021)	Economies	This research intends to find out factors that determine the strategic position of small and medium enterprises (SMEs)	The study identifies that certain factors are very relevant in developed countries: production facility, experience in the business field and attending overseas business exhibitions, access to credit the market, provision of high-quality products, research and development, and strategic location of the firm. Policymakers must work on these factors to create a favourable business environment.	Case Study
Khan et al. (2021b)	Business Strategy and the Environment	The study proposes a conceptual model to incorporate green innovation reporting in a business	The study advocates for greater disclosure on sustainability reporting by adopting certain green innovation practices (GIPs) and aligning to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), along with upgrading to ISO 56002-2019 innovation management system. This will create a level of transparency in the business and improve the stakeholder confidence and overall sustainable development performance of any firm.	Conceptual research
Lartey et al. (2021)	International Business Review	The study suggests how a firm’s offshoring activities can be impacted by environmental sustainability practices	The results indicate that sustainability practices significantly impact the offshoring activities of MNCs. When a firm owns assets or sells goods in a host country, sustainable business practices matter the most. Additionally, the analysis suggests that advanced economies reflect a higher degree of sustainability than emerging countries	Panel regression
Bose et al. (2021)	Corporate Governance: An International Review	This research examines whether banks’ green performance results in improved financial health and whether this is moderated by banks’ political connections.	Green banking performance is positively associated with a bank’s financial performance. On further analysis, it was found that cost efficiency is the main driver of this relationship. However, banks’ political connections negatively impact this relationship. Hence the firms should go green and proper regulatory standards should be in place for the same.	Sensitivity tests, correlation
Amin et al. (2021)	Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Science	The primary motive of this research is to examine the impact of the carbon tax on renewable energy consumption. Environmental sustainability is considered to be the most important since carbon emissions are on a rise, so it is imperative to focus on the consumption of renewable energy.	Businesses have shifted to renewable energy due to excessive carbon taxation as it improves corporate environmental performance (CEP). Further, it is observed that environmental audits positively moderate the relationship between carbon taxation and renewable energy.	Regression analysis
Yilmaz (2021)	World Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development	The purpose of the research is to examine the relationship between corporate sustainability (CS) to corporate financial performance (CFP).	The article reveals corporate sustainability is positively associated with financial performance. The total environment, social and governance (ESG) score is used as a proxy to measure CS, and a company should focus on all pillars collectively to impact a firm’s financial health.	Panel regression
Nutsugah et al. (2020)	International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management	This research discusses how communication of environmental performance (EP) transmits positive overall firm performance.	Companies should adopt ontegrated marketing communication (IMC) and be able to create a communication capacity and sensitize stakeholder audiences. This can act as a mediating influence between environmental performance and firm performance. Hence, a proper communication channel can positively impact the firm performance.	Survey, PLS SEM
Surmeier (2020)	Journal of Sustainable Tourism	This research investigates how sustainability standards can lead to capability-building and social upgrading processes at the firm-level	The findings suggest that sustainability standards can contribute to capacity building and social upgrading at the firm level. This research provides a process-based perspective on sustainability standards rather than just focusing on the visible outputs of standard implementation.	Mixed method

The key themes in focus have been more so on environmental sustainability: carbon taxation, green innovations and communication of environmental performance. Other elements of corporate sustainability concerning social governance provide valuable insights overall. Most of the research is empirical and lacks qualitative analysis. This indicates that the recent academic research on SBPs has yet not integrated the practitioner’s opinion; therefore, this study will enrich the extant literature, and the findings reported can probably help in strengthening the empirical outputs of the previous studies. It will also guide future researchers about the potential avenues in the field.

Research Methodology

A practitioner’s view of reality has anchored the methodology in this study. Comprehending the social actors’ expertise (Wahyuni, 2012) and constructive viewpoint is better understood by interacting and conversing with the study sample. Therefore, a focused group discussion was undertaken to apprehend the best practices undertaken by the managers, policymakers and practitioners, ensuring innovative SBPs. The groups are ‘focused’ such that all respondents participate in a shared goal (Onwuegbuzie et al., 2009). They are differentiated from other group interviews by ‘the conscious utilization of group interaction’ as primary research’ (Kitzinger, 1994). To determine the sustainable growth of company practice, a focused group discussion is the most effective way (Hamilton & Finley, 2019) to learn what people think about innovative and effective methods to adopt. Figure 1 exhibits the systematic flow of research methodology adopted in the study.

OPEN IN VIEWER Figure 1.

Research Design.

This study has visibly portrayed the importance of SBPs with the support of previous studies, it and has therefore clearly articulated the research objective around illustrating the SBPs adopted by the businesses and how these can be strengthened by capability enrichment. The experts for the focused group discussion were identified using purposive sampling. Purposive sampling is preferred (Morgan, 1996) for focused group discussions. It allows researchers to attain the participants’ expertise in their area and topic of research, further providing insightful comprehension. Therefore, the choice of experts is completely guided by the involvement of these people in the strategic decision-making process. We have prepared a sample of 231 experienced professionals working in different industries in strategic positions (CEO, Heads, Directors and so on). The choice of industry is guided by the major shift witnessed in the business practices of the firm during the recent pandemic. For example, financial services has seen a paradigm shift with technology integration into their processes; similarly, healthcare was another sector that was actively operative during COVID-19, followed by consultancy firms involved in preparing research and corporate reports about the major shift being noticed in the overall economy. Participants were drawn from three key sectors—financial services, healthcare and technology and consulting—reflecting industries with significant operational shifts during the pandemic. Companies ranged in size from small enterprises with fewer than 100 employees to large multinationals employing thousands. These firms were predominantly located in India’s major economic hubs including Mumbai, Delhi, Bangalore and Hyderabad, offering a broad perspective on the challenges and innovations driven by the pandemic across diverse urban landscapes. These professionals have been contacted through an email stating the purpose of the research. Out of the 231, only 25 agreed to participate and a further 11 were dropped due to their unavoidable work commitments. As proposed by Hennink et al. (2019), the sample size in focused group research is dependent on the number of parameters under study. In our study, two parameters, sustainable growth and capability enhancement, have been discussed. To study these parameters, four groups were created, with three-four experts in each group. To maintain the homogeneity (Odimegwu, 2000) among the participants, the classification of groups was done according to the expert domain of the speaker to initiate a collaborative yet distinctive discussion (Silverman, 2004) among the experts. The total sample size of 14 consisted of managers, policymakers and practitioners, working in top multinationals in India, as presented in Table 2.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 2.

Experts Profile.

Group	Respondent (R)	Expertise	Experience (Years)	Designation	Industry
Group 1	R1	Sales and Marketing	21	Director	Financial services
	R2		20	Head of department	International trade
	R3		22	CEO	Media
Group 2	R4	Business Analytics and Operations	19	Founder	Consulting
	R5		37	Chief operating Officer	Consulting
	R6		17	Principal consultant	IT
	R7	Finance	24	Consulting partner	Consulting
Group 3	R8	Finance	11	Senior analyst	Consulting
	R9		17	Vice president	Financial services
	R10		17	Branch manager	Financial services
	R11		27	Financial advisor	Financial services
Group 4	R12	Strategy	17	Founder and CEO	Health care
	R13		38	CEO	Healthcare
	R14		50	Founder	Consultancy

A preliminary discussion was undertaken with the experts to make them comfortable with the topic of discussion and to take consent from the participants (Sim & Waterfield, 2019) for further deliberation during the focused group discussion. The focused group discussion was conducted in virtual mode on the Zoom platform in November 2022. During the discussions, participants were prompted with targeted questions designed according to their experiences and perspectives on implementing SBPs. Examples of questions include: ‘Can you describe a successful sustainable practice implemented in your organization?’, ‘How do these practices impact your strategic decision-making?’ and ‘What challenges do you face in scaling these practices within your industry?’ The discussion was deliberated to identify and describe the SBPs that are required to strengthen the functional, operational, technological and strategic aspects of an organization. To ensure effective moderation of the virtual focused group discussions, the sessions were led by an experienced moderator supported by remote staff. The staff helped manage the discussion flow, addressed technical issues in real time and maintained backup communication channels to mitigate potential virtual constraints, ensuring comprehensive engagement and data integrity. All respondents were asked open-ended questions, and themes were identified to understand the question in consideration. The responses to the discussion were recorded with the consent of the participants. These recordings were used to transcript the discussion. After the transcription of the focused group discussions, a structured thematic analysis (as stated in Figure 2) was initiated by defining and refining themes based on the responses linked to the research questions. This process involved the careful alignment of emergent themes with our pre-defined questions to ensure that all aspects of the discussion were comprehensively addressed. The coding framework was iteratively revised to refine the specificity and relevance of themes, facilitating a deeper exploration of how these themes interrelate with established theoretical frameworks. As a result, the focused group discussion yielded qualitative data that could be systematically analyzed when transcribed. The results will be reported and interpreted in accordance with their utility for scholars, researchers, practitioners and policymakers.

OPEN IN VIEWER Figure 2.

Steps Involved in Theoretical Thematic Analysis.

Results and Discussion

The discussion on sustainability is increasingly prominent across various sectors (Kanashiro et al., 2020). These sustainability practices not only address environmental concerns but also strategically position companies for competitive advantage by reducing costs and enhancing brand reputation. The concept of CE emphasizes incentivizing the reuse, recycling, repairing and refurbishing of products rather than scrapping them and then extracting new resources (Geissdoerfer et al., 2017). To protect the environment, one must use the resources judiciously and develop new capabilities from existing resources. A paradigm shift has been observed in making green products and making processes green (Tariq et al., 2017), which aligns with our research objective to explore how sustainability practices are integrated within organizations. Nowadays, not only environmental sustainability, but industry leaders are also embracing overall sustainability to drive new value for their businesses (Yu et al., 2018). This comprehensive adoption underscores the importance of sustainability in enhancing firm value, addressing our study’s goal of investigating the impact of sustainable practices on business performance. A panellist provided insights on how the integration of sustainability into business models, especially through enhanced ESG disclosure structures, not only meets regulatory standards but also significantly benefits people, the planet and company profits. This will create value for people, the planet and society, and at the same time positively impact profits. This strategic integration of ESG practices not only aligns with global sustainability trends but also attracts ethically focused investors, enhancing the financial stability of the firm.

Apart from building sensitization, creating green business functions, sustainable value creation and working under the triple bottom line framework, some respondents emphasize abandoning outdated technologies and seeking digitization in maintaining sustainable supply chains. This transformation is crucial for developing the capabilities that support sustainable practices, directly connecting with our objective to examine capability enhancement strategies in businesses. Moreover, organizational commitment to sustainability often reflects the values and culture set by top leadership, who are encouraged to be curious, change-driven and empathetic. These qualities are essential as they dictate the direction and success of sustainability efforts within the firm. The leadership’s commitment to sustainability fosters a culture of continuous improvement and innovation, which is crucial for long-term business resilience and adaptability.

The focused group discussion largely centres on understanding the sustainability ecosystem of an organization and foreseeing how industries will shape in a 5-year timeline. The major themes extracted from these discussions included sustainability sensitization, leadership development, the integration of green business functions, the application of Industry 4.0 technologies, value creation and adherence to the triple bottom line.

Furthermore, the emphasis on training and development, digital transformation and employee connection emerged as significant sub-themes. These are viewed as critical for enhancing the knowledge base and skills of employees, which in turn improves job performance and prepares staff to handle the challenges of a hybrid working environment. Especially after COVID-19, where the survivability of the firm is challenged, some key learning from the diverse corporate experiences of the industry panellists have been presented in Table 3.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 3.

Results and Supportive Research.

Theme	Sub-theme	Deliberations of Respondents	Citation
Sustainable practices carried by the businesses	Sustainability sensitization	R7:  ‘The sustainability building guidance equips participants with the knowledge, motivation, and perhaps even the courage to be the change-makers they are.’ R12: ‘The hundreds of discussions that people have with one another every day help to shape the evolving reality.’	Hahn and Tampe (2021), Haselsteiner et al. (2021)
	Building leadership	R14: ‘Identifying and appreciating what is going on in our brains and in the minds of others we contact is a must for developing empathy and communicating it in business situations.’ R13: ‘An empathetic atmosphere may boost colleague understanding, quality involvement, leadership efficacy, and internal and external stakeholder interactions.’	Mercieca and McDonald (2021), Najafi et al. (2022)
	Green business functions	R1:    ‘Green marketing can entail various activities, including developing an environmentally friendly product, employing environmentally friendly packaging, implementing sustainable company processes, and focusing brand awareness on advertisements that communicate a product’s environmental advantages.’ R10: ‘Green finance aims to enhance the amount of money flowing into the sustainability agenda from the governmental, private, and non-profit sectors (via financial services, micro-finance, insurance, and investment).’ R2:  ‘A crucial aspect of the strategy is to effectively manage social and environmental risks, seize opportunities that provide a good return while also benefiting the environment, and increase responsibility.’ R11: ‘Raising sustainability consciousness is essential for maintaining sustainable living at the forefront of people’s thoughts. However, it also provides a chance to educate and spread the word to help safeguard the environment.’	Hasan et al. (2019), Sarkar et al. (2020), Trapp and Kanbach (2021)
	Industry 4.0 technologies	R3:  ‘The first step is to abandon outdated techniques and establish a culture of increased environmental consciousness.’ R2:  ‘The COVID-19 crisis forced buyers to take a new approach to procurement, with greater emphasis on digitalization and the use of risk-based approaches, as well as an emphasis on strategic sourcing and engagement with the market for more sustainable solutions.’	Chege and Wang (2020), Ch’ng et al. (2021)
	Value creation	R9:  ‘Entrepreneurs in sustainability practices recognize that the speed and reliability with which they respond to business sustainability prospects directly impact organizational profitability.’ R8:  ‘A gradual, unplanned shift in understanding or ideals among the members who make up an organization might increase interest and participation further leading to wealth building.’	Caby et al. (2022), Singh et al. (2022), Lozano (2022), Alichleh AL-Ali et al. (2022)
	Triple bottom line	R5:  ‘Businesses will increasingly be forced to restructure in ways conducive to becoming more socially responsible, ecologically sustainable, and even regenerative.’ R4:  ‘3Ps: People, Planet and Profits. It provides a win-win situation for the businesses to inculcate societal good by maintaining profitability and happy employees and stakeholders through their business practices.’	Lopez-Cabrales and Valle-Cabrera (2020), Khan et al. (2021b)
Capability building in the organization	Training and development	R12: ‘Strategic management and action competency are critical for sustainable development practice to establish relationships, discover challenges and acknowledge the legitimacy of various perspectives in company decision-making processes.’ R14: ‘Competencies are a group of connected skills, knowledge, perception, and values that enable someone to perform well in a job or environment.’ R9:  ‘The majority of frontline workers claim they seek career advice and participate in social activities with their co-workers fewer than once a month.’ R9:  ‘Frontline managers and peers have a great chance to be empowered to forge bonds and expand their networks.’	Schroder et al. (2021), Venn et al. (2022)
	Technology replacements	R5:  ‘In the wake of the financial crisis, many businesses have made hurried investments in data protection and moved to the cloud. These investments have permanently eliminated some of the pre-crisis obstacles to virtual contacts because of the expenditures. For the majority, the requirement to work and communicate with clients remotely has necessitated a move from paper-based contact forms to the internet.’	Chege and Wang (2020), Ch’ng et al. (2021)
	Employee connection	R4:  ‘The good, old-fashioned human touch is what is required for effective home-based work. Building trustworthy relationships characterized by encouraging leadership, reciprocal support, and shared commitment is necessary for effective at-home work.’ R6:  ‘E - filing, carpooling, virtual discussions, recycling, energy-efficient workspaces, and other environmentally friendly HR practices result in more significant efficiency improvements, cost savings, and better retention and engagement.’	Ababneh (2021), Raza et al. (2021)

Many employees are being trained to operate in a hybrid setup. These training initiatives not only enhance individual competencies but also collectively elevate the organization’s capacity to innovate and respond to market changes dynamically. Building connection with the employees has become even more important, with cases of moonlighting seeing an increase, inculcating a trustworthy relationship with employees should be encouraged. By linking these findings back to our initial research objectives, it is evident that the integration of sustainable practices within business operations not only addresses environmental and social issues but also enhances organizational capability, thus contributing to long-term business success.

Future Research Directions

The future research directions indicated by our study suggest deriving insights from the discussed themes and then formalizing these into specific research objectives (see Table 4).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 4.

Future Research Directions.

Themes	Success Factors	Future Research Directions
Sustainable practices	Sustainability sensitization	Q. What are the factors that stimulate addressing sustainability in unprecedented times? Q. What practices will help shape sustainability at an individual level and a company level?
	Building leadership	Q. What are the essential leadership styles that can enhance a manager’s effort to improve overall sustainability? Q. What are the essential sustainable leadership practices and sustainability competencies for sustainability and resilience in a company? Q. How can a business apply sustainable leadership frameworks and competencies in practice to survive and thrive for sustainable futures, especially during the pandemic era?
	Green business functions	Q. What are the various elements of green management? How do they lead to the long-term success of the company? Q. How an existing information system can support and implement sustainable green business practices?
	Industry 4.0 technologies	Q. How do modern-day technologies such as artificial Intelligence, machine learning, automation and robotics, the Internet of Things, big data analytics, blockchain and so on, give agility, transparency and resilience to a company’s supply chain? Q. How technology can assist in creating sustainable business practices?
	Value creation	Q. How can businesses survive and thrive for sustainable futures during pandemic times? Q. What is the impact of firm sustainability efforts on firm performance and valuation? Q. Which material ESG issues contribute to the financial performance of the company? How to identify them? Q. How to design a business model for sustainable value creation? What are the drivers for building these models? Q. How to develop a conceptual framework that can help companies to achieve viable business growth through improved sustainable performance?
	Triple bottom line	Q. What collaborative efforts are required to conduct business within the framework of TBL? Q. Who are the relevant stakeholders in a company? And how to manage stakeholder relationships. Q. How does a company design and implement a sustainability strategy? Q. How should a company communicate and enhance its sustainability disclosure practices? Q. What factors enable a company to have a strong oversight and governance framework?
Capability building	Training and development	Q. What are the individual characteristics as predictors of leaders’ attitudes towards training and development? Q. What kind of scenario-based planning and dynamic planning is required in building workforce strategies? Q. What are the antecedents and consequences of remote working, intending to determine a sustainable model in these unprecedented times?
	Digital transformations	Q. How to identify the risk of replacing human work with technology? Q. How to identify the necessary skill set needed by workers need in the future due to automation and artificial intelligence? Q. What is the role of technology in engaging customers, creating alternative ways of working and promoting productivity? Q. What is the role of workers in the co-creation of tech-based solutions? Q. What is the attitude of employees towards education and training in sustainable development? Q. How to build an efficacy base of knowledge, skills and resources in employees?
	Employee connection	Q. What factors lead to a breach of trust between managers and supervisors? Q. How are the workers dealing with physical and mental burnout after the pandemic? Q. What kind of mindfulness strategies are inculcated in a company? How can it be successfully integrated in the strategy tool?

The future research directions are crucial for advancing the field of SBPs. These directions propose investigating deeper into the role of technological innovations like AI and blockchain in enhancing supply chain transparency and resilience, a topic that has emerged as critical in our discussions on Industry 4.0 technologies. Additionally, exploring the effectiveness of leadership styles in fostering a culture of sustainability presents a vital avenue for further empirical study.

Conclusion

The themes of sustainability touched upon the key parameters and stressed the fact that businesses are prospering long-term only if they are working on sustainability and resilience (Caldera et al., 2017; Perotti et al., 2023). The road to corporate sustainability should ensure the creation of long-term wealth for not only shareholders but for all the stakeholders of society, at large (Dangi, 2024). The intersection of SBPs and capacity building is essential for future growth. Especially during a time when COVID-19 and uncertainty have wrapped businesses and changed the functioning of the world economy (Verma et al., 2020). During this time, the ability of the firm to survive, adapt and be resilient is paramount. How a firm absorbs the shocks of disruption and its capability to recover from a crisis justifies its existence (Kyrdoda et al., 2023). After reviewing the literature and analyzing expert industry opinion, the following has been observed. (a) The research is very emergent with respect to incorporating SBPs but it still lacks in terms of a holistic assessment of all parameters-economic, social and environmental (Barbosa-Póvoa et al., 2018). Even after brainstorming ideas with the industry leaders, it was observed that environmental sustainability forms the core of the discussion. (b) Questions relating to how implementing sustainable practices can lead to cost minimization or profit maximization still haven’t been answered in entirety. (c) Apart from SBPs, the literature is heavily dominated by building dynamic capabilities as a leveraging factor against adverse and unforeseen circumstances (Zayed et al., 2022). Our findings demonstrate the practical application of the RBVs and NRBVs, showing how internal capabilities and environmental considerations drive sustainable competitive advantages. The adaptability and strategic changes observed in the focused group discussions reflect the core principles of the Dynamic Capabilities Framework, emphasizing the importance of these theories in real-world sustainability practices.

This study distinctly contributes to understanding the transformational impact of sustainability practices on organizational resilience and adaptability, particularly in the face of global disruptions like the COVID-19 pandemic. It emphasizes the importance of dynamic capabilities in fostering an organization’s responsiveness to external changes. The experts draw some practical implications and reiterate to train employees, work on human resource skill adjustment (Edeh et al., 2021), adapt to workplace learning (Kshirsagar et al., 2020) and undertake upskilling and reskilling programmes (Raut et al., 2024). (d) It has been observed that there has been a marked increase in live learning programmes and the setting up of cross-functional response teams comprised of all stakeholder groups. Rolling out topical programmes such as remote-working skills, management and leadership skills will enrich organizational capacity building (Kshirsagar et al., 2020). To succeed, the organization should know the art of managing inclusive growth, building SBMs, hybrid organizations and social enterprises. The future generation of managers are adept at certain skills that can promote sustainability accounting and reporting.

Hence, in this article, the researchers have adopted focused group discussion as the methodology to get real-time insights from the industry. Since the literature is evolving, considering the focused group discussion, our research has initiated a conversation on better management of the new threats and anomalies, ensuring sustainability and capability building. Under sustainability and capacity building a total of nine themes have emerged including (a) sustainability sensitization (b) building leadership, (c) green business functions, (d) industry 4.0 technologies, (e) value creation, (f) triple bottom line. The other major themes talks about capability building in the organization. Various sub-themes are explored under it- (a) training and development, (b) digital transformation and (c) employee connection. This research illustrates how businesses are practicing sustainability in the era of new threats and anomalies. The findings underscore the pivotal role of integrating ESG criteria into corporate strategies, which significantly contributes to SDGs and enhances corporate reputation and stakeholder trust. This study contributes to the literature by demonstrating practical implementations of sustainability in varied organizational contexts, highlighting the interdependencies between environmental initiatives and corporate profitability.