*3.2.1 Honeybee, locust and DAC*

Avery and Bergsteiner [32] proposed the first framework of sustainable leadership based on the 'honey bee philosophy' that facilitates outcomes within and beyond the triple bottom line. The honeybee philosophy asserts that an organisation can be sustainable only if its operating context is sustainable and the basic needs of all involved are met [33]. Honeybee leadership is about stakeholder orientation, long-term focus and delivery of outcomes more responsibly [33]. Honeybee's philosophy informs leaders to pursue three key issues: Care for and develop people in an organisation, protect the planet, care for the local communities in which they operate and protect the organisational image and brand through ethical behaviour.

#### **Figure 1.**

*DAC ontology. Source: Drath, McCauley, Paulus and Velsor [25].*

#### *The Nature of Sustainable Leadership: Pitfalls, Insights and New Model DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.108833*

The opposite of the honey bee philosophy is called the locust approach to business. The locust approach upholds the belief that the only goal of a business is to generate profit and growth for its shareholders [33]. In short, the locust approach pronounces the belief of shareholders first and profits at all costs in leading an organisation. Locust leadership calls for one to be tough and ruthless and do whatever is necessary to perform well in the short term [33]. The core idea is that an individual or organisation gains an advantage only by making others suffer. At the centre, locust philosophy is the concept of a zero-sum game [33]. Honeybee's philosophy and behaviours of stakeholder centricity and the locust behaviours of shareholder primacy depict two different leadership philosophies. Avery and Bergsteiner [32] developed the first comprehensive framework of sustainable leadership based on the honey bee philosophy, which shows a shift from the shareholder view of organisations to a consideration of stakeholders with the integration of short-term goals in support of long-term objectives as a primary concern. There are two commonalities between the DAC ontology of leadership and the framework of sustainable leadership proposed by Ref. [33]. Thus, they both focus on leadership outcomes and recognise context's significant role in shaping leadership. Sustainable leadership align pro-environmental beliefs and behaviours and emerging outcomes, such as environmental performance and sustainability performance, which are not part of the conventional ontology of leadership.

Critical theorists such as Bendell et al. [28] emphasise the need to differentiate sustainable leadership from traditional leadership. The effort by scholars to draw uncritically from mainstream leadership approaches to define sustainability often results in exceptionalism (e.g. transformational leadership 'for' sustainability). Clarity of frame-sustaining or frame-breaking change in leadership theory is vital to understand the magnitude and nuances of integrating sustainability into leadership. Sustainability 'bolted on' to a pre-existing leadership framework or theory is seen as shallow, an attachment and not integral to leadership. Frame-sustaining change entails using existing leadership theories and paradigms to adapt and work more efficiently on what leadership is already doing. Frame-sustaining behaviour by leadership includes a narrow focus on one aspect while failing to address the bigger issues that institutionalise unsustainability.

On the other hand, sustainability 'built-in' leadership resonates with framebreaking change. The theoretical sustainability lens deeply and widely permeates and reconfigures the pre-existing tripod and DAC ontologies of leadership to create new and more effective leadership given sustainability thresholds, limits and challenges. **Figure 2** depicts a baseline model of sustainable leadership driven by a sustainability lens to enable deep, wide and lasting integration of sustainability into leadership.

To be effective, sustainable leadership entails frame-breaking change. This change emphasises deep and lasting shifts in direction, procedures and culture to enable organisations to work more differently, effectively and sustainably. Notably, integrating the sustainability lens with ontologies of leadership is necessary to understand sustainable leadership. The following section underscores the need to shift from conceptions of leadership in a closed system to leadership in an open and connected context to enhance our understanding of sustainable leadership.

#### **3.3 Systems view of sustainable leadership**

Sustainable leaders must be system thinkers able to see the big picture while also paying attention to details, relationships between parts of a system, and how these parts combine to create the emergent properties of a whole. The systems lens

**Figure 2.** *Baseline model of sustainable leadership. Source: Own.*

of sustainable leadership relies on two key issues, namely the interconnectivity at multiple levels of leadership and sustainable leadership in an open system.
