An increasing number of organizations are subscribing to sustainability, but how can sustainability performance be measured? Unlike financial performance, which can be assessed through accounting techniques that aggregate various numeric indicators, sustainability performance is more complicated. For financial institutions the situation is even less straightforward - while traditional sustainability frameworks, such as the triple bottom line (TBL), are concerned with the direct inputs and outputs of an organization, financial institutions have indirect impacts based on the loans and financial instruments they offer. Triodos Bank, a pioneer in the sustainability banking sector since it was founded in the Netherlands in 1972, has been grappling with this issue. Peter Blom, Triodos Bank's CEO, defined sustainable banks as "value-driven banks" that "prioritize people over profits" by "lend[ing] to and invest[ing] in organizations that benefit people and the environment." Transforming this definition of sustainable banking into a tangible performance measurement framework was a significant challenge facing managers at Triodos Bank. From aiding loan officers in their decision-making process to determining how successful Triodos Bank was at fulfilling its mission, measuring sustainability performance was a daunting yet critical challenge.The case assesses Triodos Bank's various initiatives, along with the current best practices for measuring sustainability performance. While some frameworks have been developed to cater to the financial sector, particularly the investment sector (which has many similarities to the sustainable banking sector), no existing frameworks effectively convey the sustainability performance of Triodos Bank.The case therefore provides an excellent vehicle for students to develop a sustainability performance measurement framework for Triodos Bank.

This is an MIT Sloan Management Review article. Today, as consumer choices on one side of the planet affect living conditions for people on the other side and complex supply chains span the globe, businesses are facing a host of "sustainability" problems--social and ecological imbalances created by that globalization. Beginning in the late 1990s, organizational members of the Society for Organizational Learning (SOL--including Shell, Harley-Davidson, HP, Xerox, and Nike, among others) began a series of initiatives focusing on collaborative solutions to a variety of sustainability issues. The group's goals have included the application of systems thinking, working with mental models, and fostering personal and shared vision to face these complex sustainability issues. Through its work, SOL (of which two of the authors are founding members) has learned that successful collaborative efforts embrace three interconnected types of work--conceptual, relational, and action-driven--which together build a healthy "learning ecology" for systemic change. In this article, the authors offer examples from particular projects in which learning ecology provided an important foundation for substantive progress, and they draw lessons for companies and managers regarding each of the three types of work. Ultimately, the authors conclude that conceptual, relational, and action-driven work must be systemically interwoven and that there is little real precedent for that. They offer several guidelines for how it can be accomplished, emphasizing leadership and transactional networks. Finally, they pose three questions that must be answered if systemic solutions are to be successful: (1) How can we get beyond benchmarking to building learning communities? (2) What is the right balance between specifying goals and creating space for reflection and innovation? and (3) What is the right balance between private interest and public knowledge?