The question that stimulated this article was the following: Can a species that destroys the living environment on which it depends be considered intelligent?
We, and the business world, have more in common with nature and our planet than we can imagine. Valuable lessons can be drawn from the functioning of the ecosystem, from the interpersonal (or rather, “inter-vegetal”) relationships between one tree species and another, and from how animals behave.
The cold temperatures for trees are, for example, a bit like the difficulties that we humans encounter. And just as trees need the cold to then flourish again, we too need difficulties to improve.
Even the metaphor of the garden, which includes, incorporates, and grows, but which also undergoes radical transformations caused by a changing climate, is applicable in many ways to today’s organizations. Some simple examples.
Every garden (like a business) has a purpose. Several plants grow in the garden, each different and with different roles, but together they fulfill the purpose of the garden. Each plant needs different things; some need a lot of sun, some prefer shade, some need a lot of water, some less. There are plants that need support to grow better, while others do well on their own.
In a global world, companies welcome more and more people, even from different origins, with their specific skills, so that the organization can offer innovative solutions to a market increasingly hungry for new products and services. And no leadership can avoid putting care for people and the corporate climate at the center.
We humans often associate leadership with a position or role, but we should learn from nature which is based on an ecosystem of collaboration, adaptability, and awareness. A continuous unfolding between leading and following, between strength and vulnerability, between being resilient and adapting.
Soil is like the culture of a company: if it is not suitable for plants (people, the central element in companies), they will not grow.
And in nature, if a seed doesn’t grow, you have to find out why and try to change the conditions, perhaps plant it in another part of the garden, where the conditions are better suited to this type of plant.
Translated into organizational terms, the company system must create the conditions for skills and results to develop in the best possible way, also paying attention to emotions understood as levers of activation and support. When these emotional conditions disappear, a process of withdrawal and involution that is difficult to reverse is triggered. Giving space to the emotional dimension can represent one of the ingredients of the organization’s success.
In nature, it is pruned. However, the action of shears and saws, and the removal of dry or exuberant branches is beneficial for what comes next. Thus in a company, failure to innovate or eliminate non-functional business areas causes dispersion of strategic focus. Everything we hold up requires concentration on activities that make it rich.
Finally, who makes sure that each plant gets what it needs so that it can grow and become big and strong?
Here is the gardener, who has the role of taking care of and understanding the needs of each individual plant and creating the right conditions for development, without forgetting the entire garden, taking care of the surrounding environment so that the plants can grow. He focuses on removing obstacles and creating a system in which plants can grow and develop, solving problems, and taking responsibility.
A good leader must create the ideal conditions for the growth of people and the company, aiming to team up with people and transversally, given that companies function as a single system that is made up of different transversal processes that cross the areas of an organization.
Consolidated leadership dynamics have pushed managers to increasingly lose tune with nature. The causes are multiple. Among these, are the stratification of beliefs and conditioning and the profound difficulty in embracing unconventional visions that take into account the world in all its dimensions.
By being inspired by nature, leadership would acquire much more value.
Nature is the oldest “manager” in history. When we look at what is truly sustainable, in fact, the only model that has worked for long periods of time is that of the natural world.
A very interesting study proposes a “biomimetic” leadership model, that is, inspired by nature, considered as a model, measure, and mentor: a vision of holistic leadership, which goes beyond the current anthropocentric systems. An approach to innovation that seeks sustainable solutions to human challenges by emulating nature’s proven models and strategies. A leadership model, called “organizational biomimicry”, with a systemic approach that considers the organization an integral part of nature and continually learning from it.
This biomimetic leader would be a person committed to their personal and professional growth, emotionally involved in the organization for which they work, and willing to accompany it in its development process, in harmony with the environment. In other words the real source of inspiration and learning for his leadership model is nature, of which he feels responsible and an integral part. Biomimetic leadership would translate into strategic management capable of integrating sustainability dimensions more efficiently.
I found this study very interesting.
The objective of these studies is to offer a different perspective on leadership that starts from the observation of nature. Because, after all, Mother Nature has been training her leadership champions through evolution for millions of years, perfecting strategies and systems that have achieved great levels of harmony, growth, and resilience.
Looking at the animal and plant worlds, we can derive lessons that are not theoretical, but essentially practical and have brilliantly stood the test of time. If leaders can understand and draw from these success stories, they will be able to address their challenges more effectively and lead with a vision and purpose that aligns not just with organizational or personal goals, but with the essence of life itself.
To return to the question I asked myself at the start, I should conclude that, based on the criterion of adaptation to the environment, we humans are not as intelligent as we believe: our desire to impose ourselves on other animals and on Nature has created a world full of suffering, injustice and serious imbalances in the ecosystem. We have so impoverished the Earth that we risk no longer having a suitable environment even for our own lives (and this is not very intelligent!).
To change we need to learn from flocks of birds and from ants, and from plants, which teach us that it is possible to achieve amazing results when the parts cooperate with each other. Thinking in terms of cooperation represents a paradigm shift capable of radically modifying our relationship with the environment. To realize that we humans and all living beings are part of Nature, that we constitute a single living system, and only in this way make wiser and more ethical choices to live in a better world.
The bottom line is clear: We must learn to live and lead as nature does, with balance, foresight, and an unwavering commitment to the greater good. And if organizations want to pursue sustainable development objectives, by helping to create a new model of society, according to criteria of greater responsibility in social, environmental, and economic terms, aimed at avoiding the collapse of the earth’s ecosystem, perhaps they must learn to breathe, listen, remember, speak such as plants.
