In late 2017, the co-owners of Rocky Mountain Soap Company in Canmore, Alberta, faced an important challenge. Their company produced and retailed toxin-free, 100 per cent natural bath and body products, and they wanted the product packaging to reflect their company’s commitment to sustainability. To meet the challenge of identifying and implementing sustainable packaging solutions, the co-owners needed to address intensifying competition, make good use of their limited ability to conduct research and development, and manage their customers’ expectations. How could the co-owners develop a packaging solution that aligned with the company’s brand focus of “100 per cent natural”? How could they find the support they needed to move the company forward?
In 2010, EPCOR Utility Inc.’s application to implement new metering technologies was denied by the Alberta Utilities Commission. By 2014, however, several key changes had taken place in regulations and in the cost of smart meters. With another application to the Alberta Utilities Commission due in just four months, the director at EPCOR Utility Inc. was contemplating several options, all of which involved carefully considering the interests of many different stakeholders and the development of a thorough and thoughtful implementation plan.
In November 2016, the co-founders of Poppy Barley Inc. (Poppy Barley) had just finished discussing the company’s fiscal projections and sustainability goals for the upcoming 2017 year. Poppy Barley, a made-to-measure footwear retailer in Edmonton, Alberta, had grown rapidly. The co-founders, who were sisters, wanted to further both their product line and their commitments to corporate sustainability. Would becoming certified as a sustainable business publicize their commitments and values, and improve their triple bottom line? If so, which certification should they choose? On the other hand, given the company’s growth stage, would directing finite resources toward certification detract from other important business areas?
The owner and operator of two stores that sold organic groceries and fair-trade goods in Edmonton, Alberta was proud of what he had built; however he was worried about the financial sustainability of his downtown location. Since its opening in 2014, the downtown store had constantly struggled to remain profitable in the face of extremely high overhead costs. The original Whyte Avenue location of Earth’s General Store, highly popular with its loyal patrons, had been subsidizing the downtown store just to keep its doors open. This practice was certainly not a long-term solution, and in early 2016, the owner needed to create a new business strategy that would balance his company’s financial needs with its social and environmental missions.
In 2010, three friends created Fruits of Sherbrooke as a way to rescue local fruit that would otherwise be wasted. The founders knew their efforts would be beneficial for the environment and for people in need of food. In February 2016, having grown their business into a successful social enterprise entirely through the help of volunteers, they faced important decisions. Realistically, they would not always be able to run the organization, which meant facing issues of succession. Additionally, they needed to decide how to balance growth strategies with their commitment to the social good. Should the organization focus on maximizing profitability or should decisions for growth be based only on providing the greatest benefit possible to the community and environment?
The Poultry Research Centre at the University of Alberta farm was an internationally recognized research, development, and learning hub. It began the Rare Poultry Conservancy Program in 1986 as a way to maintain heritage chicken breeds. In 2009/10, as a result of the global financial crisis, university funding was reduced, and every campus department needed to cut programs or find creative ways to finance them outside of the traditional methods. By 2014, the funding cuts posed a grave concern for the continuation of the heritage chicken program. Annual costs of CA$75,000 were required to maintain the flocks with very limited financial return. However, a leader at the Poultry Research Centre felt that the birds were important enough to develop a model where they could pay for themselves.