Mainstreaming sustainable leadership in the world of work

“We must change direction now if we want to preserve hope for a sustainable future. Therefore, we need leaders and managers that set a sustainable direction and embrace the green transition.”
Torkild Justesen, Secretary General of CEC European Managers

CEC European Managers and its partners are proud to present you with « Mainstreaming Sustainable Leadership », a report covering the conclusions and recommendations of the Sustainable Leadership EU Project. In this publication, we explore why and how social partners have piloted the Sustainable leadership project. Every day, managers and leaders take hundreds of decisions that have a direct impact on our societies and economies.

With almost 10 million managers in the EU alone, there is a strong responsibility for them to lead the sustainability transition personally and professionally. “We believe that sustainable leadership is one of the key elements to reach the Sustainable Development Goals and fulfil the ambitions of the EU Green Deal.”  says Torkild Justesen.

But the European workforce and particularly the managerial workforce need new competencies. The research covered by the report shows that managers aren’t equipped with Sustainable Leadership. Indeed, only 17% of EU managers said they have been educated or trained on sustainability. It has become clear that investments need to be poured onto sustainability education and trainings.

The sustainable leaders project has designed a pilot training programme that responded to the needs of managers in this transition. The trainings provide a new model incorporating competencies needed for managers to integrate sustainability into their organisation’s activities.

Today’s challenge is to mobilise the resources for change to happen on the ground, it is a leadership challenge. Leaders and managers embracing sustainable leadership will need to promote organisational learning, upskilling and create new sustainable jobs. Skills for green jobs as well as skills for greening the jobs are decisive to make the transition happen.

Our sustainable leadership model, our trainings and our community development have supported leaders and managers in their pioneering work to mainstream sustainable leadership. But many more actions can be taken now to continue our efforts and leverage impact on sustainability performance.

Are you ready for #SustainableLeadership?

Read the report: Mainstreaming Sustainable Leadership here

Read the Annex: A Sustainable Work Agenda here  

Leading sustainability with purpose

“Leading sustainability with purpose” – Part 2 of the Sustainable Leaders’ Series on the Sustainable Leadership Model
By Gabriela Buettner, senior consultant at New Angles, consulting partners of Sustainable Leaders

The fundamental challenge of integrating sustainability into business is that it requires managers at all levels to see the world differently and define success differently. We can’t hope to accelerate the global transition to sustainable business using the same leadership mindset that has single-mindedly pursued rising quarterly profits and limitless growth for decades.

Against that background, the Sustainable Leadership model offers a new approach of leading the transition towards deeply sustainable business models, products and services. The model consists of 5 different dimensions that build on each other, as well as on existing best practices within organisations.

So, where does the transition journey start? With values, convictions and purpose, the base of the model and the dimension we’ll focus on in this second part of our series about the Sustainable Leadership Model.


When these three aspects are aligned, as a leader you are coherent, credible and inspire confidence in others – clearly embodying that ‘Why’ which incites people to follow you.

This is also the part of the iceberg that goes the deepest – and also the least visible or tangible, but which remains the foundation for the rest of the dimensions. What do you fundamentally believe in? What are your convictions? Your sense of purpose at work?

Let me highlight a few aspects of this dimension that are essential for a leader of sustainability:

The courage to act based on your personal convictions on sustainability. The courage to act based on your desire for a more just society and a healthy environment. Without this, change towards sustainability is not possible. We’ve seen many “positive impact pioneers” in all types of organizations – they exist and are already modeling change wherever they are in the organization.

The ability to create a link between past, present, and future generations. The time aspect of sustainability is important and obviously goes far beyond the short-term. The sustainable leader is convinced that we need to see things in a global sense – what we did yesterday, what we’re doing today, and where we want to go tomorrow are all connected. This leader naturally has a deep concern for future generations.

Looking for meaning in work. Sustainable leaders need meaning in their work above and beyond “making a living”, and find it in leading their organizations and teams towards sustainable ways of doing business.

Stubborn optimism. This is about not giving up, no matter what the obstacles. The sustainable leader knows that there are and will be many, especially when it’s about changing an entire way of thinking that has been in place for years and years.

In our work with companies we see that in parts of the corporate world the basis for sustainable leadership is already recognized and promoted. For instance, in some large multinationals, recruitment is no longer merely based on the CV, but rather on the “who you are” and “what your values are.” Do they match with the values and the vision of the company? Of course, experience and know-how also influence the decision, but it is not what will make the difference in picking one candidate over another.

We invite you to reflect about your own purpose, values and convictions before reading the next parts of the series:

– what do you think managers and business leaders need to do to protect life on Earth?
– what is your personal motivation and conviction on leading sustainably?
– what would you like your professional purpose to be about?

More information

Read Part 1 of the series on the Sustainable Leadership Model

Sustainable Leaders’ Summit 2021: new leadership for new times

On 26 November, the first Sustainable Leaders’ Summit will gather stakeholders to discuss the role managers play in the sustainable transformation of the European economy. The unprecedented sustainability challenges call for a new type of leadership to create long-term value for people and planet. The event is organised by CEC European Managers in the context of its EU project on Sustainable Leadership.

The online Summit will provide a forum for new approaches to sustainability in leadership and at the workplace. While many sustainability initiatives do currently not deliver the expected results, the notion of Sustainable Leadership brings together individual responsibility with larger-scale impacts. For Maxime Legrand, President of CEC European Managers, it is clear that “managers will be key for putting into practice the Green Deal. They have to become designers of an economy that protects life, creates a new kind of growth and reconciliates personal aspirations with professional ones.”

With a diverse portfolio of speakers from business, academia and politics, the Summit aims at drawing a pathway for transitioning to sustainable business models and a sustainable economy. The one day event will provide scientific evidence, managerial best practices and leadership transition stories to help managers become Sustainable Leaders. At the same time, it will be an occasion to discuss how to transform workplaces and create new sustainable jobs. Next to market mechanisms and legislative instruments, there will also be room to explore new economic approaches, including the Regenerative Economy, through keynote speaker Carol Sanford.

The Summit is the conclusion of a two-year EU-funded project on Sustainable Leadership. Based on the study “Sustainable Leadership in Europe”, the project has modeled Sustainable Leadership and piloted a training programme for managers in Europe. Other side initiatives add to the project, to raise awareness and mobilise European managers further. a Sustainable Leaders Community has been launched to bring together ambitious change-makers. Sustainable Leaders Ambassadors will ensure that the topic will benefit from greater attention by policy-makers, training providers and businesses. Finally, a Sustainable Leaders Charter will be launched at the Summit to commit managers individually on making a sustainable impact within their stakeholder system.

Find more information and register here

CEC European Managers and its project partners together represent around 7 million managers through their national and sectoral member organisations. Sustainable Leaders has been created in 2020 in the framework of the “Sustainable Leadership for a Fair and Green Transition” Project led by CEC European Managers and co-funded by the European Commission.

Sustainability measurement and reporting in Europe

To be able to change a company’s or organisation’s performance in the economic, governance, social and environmental dimensions of sustainability, it is important to understand how sustainability is being measured and reported. Managers need to understand the different sustainability indicators, covered by frameworks as described below, be able to measure the right and relevant things and then report on the sustainability impacts in a transparent and integrated way. This article is an extract from the “Sustainable Leadership in Europe” report.

Identifying sustainability risk increasingly becomes a competitive advantage. Only few companies are describing these risks in their reports, as the results of the Alliance for Corporate Transparency analysis of implementation of the EU Non-Financial Reporting Directive shows.

Sustainability Reporting is often characterised by the use of several acronyms such as “Non-Financial information Reporting (NFR)”, “Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Reporting”, “Environment, Social and Governance (ESG) Reporting”, “Extended external Reporting (EER)”, or “Integrated Reporting (IR)”.

In order to introduce the idea of Sustainability Reporting we refer to the definition given by the European Court of Auditors, European Union (2019)[1]: “Sustainability Reporting is the practice of measuring, disclosing and being accountable to internal and external stakeholders for Organisational performance towards the goal of sustainable development. It involves reporting on how an Organisation considers Sustainability issues while running its operations, and on its environmental, social and economic impacts. A Sustainability Report also presents the Organisation’s values and governance model and demonstrates the link between its strategy and its commitment to a sustainable global economy“.

It is crucial to highlight that a Sustainability Report is the product of a process.

The prerequisites to be focused for meaningful Sustainability reporting are:

  • Stakeholders’ involvement
  • Analysis of what Sustainability elements are material/matters
  • Identification of Sustainability risks & opportunities
  • Development of a Sustainability strategy
  • Setting of managerial Sustainability objectives
  • Integration of Sustainability into the budget process based on objectives measured by indicators
  • Sustainability performance measurement and reporting

Although recent norms have expanded both the spread of the reporting process and the adoption of homogeneous of methodological disclosure criteria, Sustainability reporting can manifest itself in many heterogeneous ways, both for processes and for disclosure methodologies adopted. The solutions do range from narrow environment-focused reporting to reports analysing the effects on the whole stakeholder system (Environmental, Social, Economic, Governance), as well as modules contemplating Sustainability strategies integrated into corporate business models.

The number of businesses reporting on the ESG impacts has exponentially grown throughout the last 25 years. At the same time, investors have increasingly grown interest in ESG data. For instance, the Social Responsible Investments, SRI sum up to 26% of the total investments (58% of which take place in Europe)[2].

In 2018, The European Commission published the EU Action Plan for Sustainable Finance in order to attract more private interests for sustainable activities and foster the integration of ESG criteria in the investments processes.



Directive 2014/95 / EU has the objective to drive and lead the methods of publication of non-financial information by Companies, helping to spread transparency of non-financial performances by stakeholders, while strengthening trust between companies, citizens and public and financial institutions[3].

The following criteria define the “Public Interest Entities” which are bound to publish non-financial reporting:

  • Average number of Employees superior to 500 throughout the financial year
  • Exceeded at least one of the two limits by the balance sheet closing date:
    • A balance sheet total of at least 20 million Euros
    • Total Net Revenue from products and/or services sales equivalent to at least 40 million Euro.

In terms of content required, these entities are required to provide a non-financial reporting containing “at least” environmental, social, personnel information, respect for human rights, the fight against corruption, to an extent necessary to understand the progress of the company, its results, its situation and the impact of its business and the main risks associated with social-environmental issues deriving from business activities.

In particular, this disclosure must contain, in addition to a brief description of the company business model, information on the policies applied by the Company regarding the above mentioned aspects and on the results achieved thanks to the implementation of these policies.

In the case the company does not adopt any policy, it is required to provide “A clear and detailed explanation” of this choice (“comply or explain”).

In terms of Report collocation, the NFR Directive provides an option for non-financial statements to be included in the annual report or in a stand-alone report, and it requires companies to specify which reporting frameworks they have relied on.

The main options found are:

  • Separate reports
  • Report included in the annual management report as a distinct section
  • Report included in the financial statements file as a separate section
  • Report included in the management report with references

The major disclosure areas concerning the reporting perimeter are:

  • Impact evaluation & policies
  • Risks evaluation
  • Outcomes
  • KPI’s
  • Business model description.

With regards to the Reporting frameworks, the European Commission Guidelines clarify that the information contained in the non-financial declaration must be provided according to the methodologies and principles envisaged by the reporting standard chosen as reference

The “Reporting Standards” are “the standards and guidelines issued by authoritative supranational bodies, international or national, of public or private nature, functional, in whole or in part, to fulfil the non-financial reporting obligations in question”.

The organisations subject to this directive can rely on national, EU or international standards such as[4]:

  • Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)
  • United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDG’s)
  • UN Global Compact (UNGC)
  • United Nations Guiding Principles Reporting Framework (UNGP)
  • ISO 26000
  • CDP environmental reporting system and framework
  • International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC)
  • Sustainability Accounting Standard Boards (SASB)
  • OECD Guidelines/General or sectoral due diligence guidance
  • Climate Disclosure Standards Board Framework
  • International Labour Organisation standards
  • European Commission Guidelines on Non-Financial Reporting
  • ILO StandardsThe eco-management and audit system (EMAS)
  • The OECD guidelines for multinational enterprises
  • Other national or international recognised standards

Companies are anyway allowed to adopt independent reporting methodologies, but in this case,  they are requested to provide “clear and detailed description of such methodology and the reasons for its adoption”.



The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) is the most used reporting standard worldwide.

The Global Reporting Initiative GRI is a non-profit Organisation created with the aim of supporting both the public sector and the private sector in understanding, measuring and communicating the impact that any activity can have on the various dimensions of sustainability (economic, environmental and social).

GRI recently formulated the new version of its NFR Guidelines, giving life to the GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards), which replaced the original GRI G4 Guidelines. The new guidelines are structured in a modular and interconnected system of standards characterized by flexibility and versatility, and therefore easily adaptable to the profile of companies. The new system defines on one hand the general standards (foundation, general disclosure standards and management approach) and on the other, three sets of specific standards dedicated to the three fundamental impact dimensions: Economic, Environmental, Social.

The general standards give the organisation a practical guide on how to structure its Sustainability report and what basic principles to follow, including the pivotal principle of materiality. By applying the principles and guidelines of the GRI 101, it is in fact possible to identify the specific aspects of its business that have the most significant impacts — positive and / or negative — both on business and on stakeholders. Starting from the results of the materiality analysis, the company will be able to select, among the set of specific standards, the most suitable ones to represent and measure the impacts identified as most relevant.

In parallel, two general standards must also be applied: the GRI 102 (General Disclosures) serves to report context information relating to the Organisation and its reporting practices, while the GRI 103 (Management Approach) explains how the relevant features are operationally managed by the Organisation.

Each standard follows a similar structure, based on “Reporting requirements”, “Recommendations” and “Guidance” aimed at facilitating the understanding of mandatory and optional information requirements.

In drafting its report, each company has the possibility to choose at what level to apply the GRI Standards, compared to three different solutions:

  • GRI “in accordance Core“, in which the company has a set of mandatory profile information, as well as having to report at least one indicator for each material aspect;
  • GRI “in accordance Comprehensive“: where the mandatory Organisational profile information is significantly higher, especially with respect to governance, and all the KPIs provided by the standard material results for the company, must be reported;
  • GRI “referenced Claim“, introduced with the new standards, in which companies can select some specific set standards[5].



The legislation requires that companies follow a criterion of relevance — or “materiality” — to select the aspects that must be treated in the NFR.

Therefore, the description of the company’s activities, risks, policies and its socio-environmental impacts must concern those issues which, taking into account peculiarities of the company and the sector in which it operates, reflect more directly the economic impacts, environmental and social aspects of the organisation and the relationship with stakeholders.

This assessment is done through a materiality analysis, which consequently allows the company to identify which issues are to be considered priorities in relation to its business strategy and the stakeholder expectations. The information will have to focus on these issues, going to specify the objectives, management methods and results achieved.

The analysis ends with the definition of the Materiality Matrix, a matrix graphic representation that relates the assessment of relevance attributed to the various issues by the company (abscissa axis) and by stakeholders (ordered axis).



The European Commission emphasizes that the management of Sustainability ought to be anchored to a clear long-term strategy, which finds its declination in an implementation plan which explains the priority areas, the lines of action, the qualitative and quantitative objectives. These elements must be formalised and publicly communicated.

Therefore, the NFR must include information relating to the strategy, the business model, the Sustainability objectives of the Company.

Furthermore, an important aspect connected to the NFR is the one related to Non-Financial Risks.

The European Directive, as well as the subsequent Decree 254, paid attention to disclosure on short, medium and long term non-financial risks, specifying that Companies should explain how the main risks can influence their business model, their operations, their financial results and the impact of their activities.

In recent years, Companies have invested significant resources in risk management models and Sustainability initiatives. Recently, under the pressure of a growing economic and reputational exposure to the risks associated with Environmental, Social and Governance factors, many Companies are working on the integration of the corporate processes that govern the management of business risks (“Enterprise Risk Management” or “ERM”) and Sustainability issues.



The ability to manage ESG risks and opportunities has increasingly become a yardstick for assessing the solidity of Companies, as well as being a decision driver for investment choices. The analysis of the non-financial rating (ESG Rating) is therefore a structured tool that aims to provide detailed information for the improvement of investment choices and alongside the traditional financial rating.

The ESG rating is based on a process for interpreting Sustainability-related performance. That is, it depends on the assessment of the specific Sustainability risk scenario connected to the sector to which it belongs and to the specific company conditions and is therefore at the sole discretion of the ESG Rating Agency.

The lack of methodological and evaluation homogeneity can thus generate divergences in ESG ratings with reference to the same company.

ESG rating agencies use different methods and approaches when assessing environmental, social and governance aspects, and conceptualise ESG performance differently.

The main sources of divergence are scope divergence, weight divergence, measurement divergence[6].

The most important ESG Rating Agencies are:

  • Climetrics (CDP – eg Carbon Disclosure Project)
  • ECPI
  • Morningstar
  • MSCI
  • Refinitiv
  • S&P Global Ratings
  • Vigeo Eiris
  • ISS-Oekom
  • Sustainalytics


Taking note of the recent study The Alliance for Corporate Transparency Research Report[7] on the results generated by the European Union’s non-financial information directive, it can be said that the directive’s firm intention to link “policies, risks and results” is still far from being fully realized. Reporting practice is spreading, but there is a risk that Companies tend to report the policy and much less the results, the metrics and the interventions aligned with declared policy objectives.

Too many Companies still fail to set specific targets in line with the Paris Accord or the Sustainable Development Goals and measure their progress accordingly. Most Companies need to improve their reporting on targets on climate change, with specific risk mitigation strategies. And many Companies need to adequately address the supply chain.  On social issues, Companies are seen too often conflating social goals with treatment of employees. And Governance is so often the one missed off the list as the NFR Directive does not explicitly require any specific governance-related disclosures.

Finally, the clarity of reporting is often affected by the lack of homogeneity in the frameworks used and in the presentation summary of the KPI’s.


[1] European Court of Auditors – European Union, (2019).

[2] KPMG, (2019), Survey on Application of Italian Law nbr. 254/2016

[3] KPMG, (2019), Survey on Application of Italian Law nbr. 254/2016;

[4] Bold F., (2019) The Alliance for Corporate Transparency Research Report – An analysis of the Sustainability reports of 1000 Companies pursuant to the EU Non-Financial Reporting Directive, 2019.

[5] KPMG, (2019), Survey on Application of Italian Law nbr. 254/2016;

[6] Berg F., Koelbel J. F., Rigobon R., (2019), Aggregate Confusion: The Divergence of ESG Ratings, Management Sloan School.

[7] Bold F., (2019) The Alliance for Corporate Transparency Research Report – An analysis of the Sustainability reports of 1000 Companies pursuant to the EU Non-Financial Reporting Directive, 2019.

Managers need skills for greening jobs

The transition to a more inclusive and net zero economy requires people who can create value in line with societal needs and planetary boundaries. These “green jobs” do however not come from nowhere. As the “Sustainable Leadership in Europe” study shows, managers need to be equipped with “Green Skills for Greening the Jobs” skills.

The managerial evolution from a traditional leadership — business as usual leadership — to a Sustainable Leadership aiming at the Sustainable transformation of our economy, needs to overcome existing relevant gaps within the current managerial professional category. These gaps concerning the key Sustainability/green skills and competences necessary to the management of a phenomenon, are so vast and complex that it has effectively been renamed as the “Sustainability Elephant”.

Training requirements can be very broad in terms of different needs in terms of the geopolitical area, the industrial sectors and company reality, the organisational functions or managerial levels. It therefore makes sense to systematise the potential different areas of training requirements.

First, we shall properly distinguish between:

  • Green skills for Green jobs: skills required for specific jobs as a response to the need for managerial transition, with roles such as “CSR manager”, “Sustainability Manager”, “Energy Manager”, etc.
  • Green skills for Greening the Jobs: new skills for traditional managers with a view to shift traditional roles towards transition in order to play an active role in Sustainable Leadership

We then shall distinguish specific skills from generic skills:

  • Technical (specific) skills: These skills are particularly relevant for the green economy, for it requires multidisciplinary approaches, including professionals from different backgrounds such as engineers, architects, ecologists and archaeologists. The specific skills are not completely new but rather the result of mixing pre-existing competences. There are several career opportunities of this kind within the Green Economy.
  • Generic Skills: these skills can be divided into two categories. The first concerns the Generic Soft Skills, such as the relational and communication talents, and being able to work in groups. The second revolves around the Generic Managerial Skills, such as the strategic leadership, innovation skills, creativity and resource management. A good transversal comprehension of the technological and scientific topics is strongly suggested.

Since the Sustainability transformation affects all sectors and managerial position, it is of crucial importance to create a level playing field with regards to Generic Sustainable Skills, including managerial and soft skills.

Figure 2.5-7 Skills for Sustainable Leadership





Sustainable Leadership Guidelines

The Sustainable Leadership Guidelines provide innovative and practical advice to managers for transforming thought patterns, behaviours and processes in companies and beyond.

In many regards, our current way of producing, living and working has proven to be unsustainable. We have to change track and pursue a path in alignment to environmental, social and economic imperatives. Actors as diverse as policy-makers, businesses, managers and citizens have to contribute their fair share to attain the Sustainable Development Goals.

Since sustainable development consists of multiple dimensions and requires action at all levels, both political framework conditions and practices in organisations need to evolve. It’s about thinking both aspects together. There is urgency in shifting the current paradigm and reinvent the way we conceive both policies and the purpose of organisations in the light of the pressing environmental, but also social and economic challenges we are currently facing.

In fact, reorienting the purpose of organisations towards environmental and social objectives seems to also pay off economically. For instance, mounting evidence suggests[1] that firms investing in (material) sustainability tend to outperform other companies on traditional measures of performance. Despite that, only few companies have a unified sustainability strategy and even fewer have followed-up with actions, according to a McKinsey survey[2].

Against that background, the three intertwined dimensions of sustainable development [3] offer useful insights to businesses on what to change. They are helpful to understand the different impacts of production and consumption patterns. However, it is crucial to make sense of them at individual level: as a manager, as a worker or as a citizen. Furthermore, the question of “what impact” (on the environment etc.) is closely tied to the procedural “how” of achieving change (company structures and processes). For these reasons, personal and procedural sustainability add to the classical dimensions of economy, society and environment in the Sustainable Leadership Guidelines.

Discover how leadership can contribute to driving the sustainable shift and attain the Sustainable Development Goals in CEC European Managers’ Sustainable Leadership Guidelines (PDF).



[3] Environment, society and economy

Launch of the Sustainable Leadership Project

CEC European Managers has started the year 2020 with a European project aiming at piloting a training scheme to mainstream sustainable leadership skills. Only 17% of European managers are trained on sustainability, as our recent report shows. Therefore, CEC will commission a European survey assesses the challenges and opportunities of managers’ specific skills needed for the transition. On the basis of the study results, a training programme will be designed to equip European managers of all backgrounds with the necessary competences in the areas of systemic thinking, Triple Bottom Line accounting, as well as transversal leadership skills such as empathy or mindfulness.

The “Sustainable Leadership for a Fair and Green Transition” project, funded by the European Commission’s DG Employment, will run from January 2020 until the end of 2021. Led by CEC European Managers, it will build on a strong network of national and European organisations, including the project partners Lederne (Denmark), ULA (Germany), MAS (Slovenia), Eurocadres (EU) and CESI (EU). Besides conducting the survey to assess managers’ sustainability skills and providing trainings, the project will also tackle the question of how managerial trade unions and associations can contribute to mainstreaming sustainable leadership through social dialogue. Since social dialogue is demonstrably boosting both economic and social performance of businesses (and avoiding social unrest), it makes sense to incorporate the environmental dimension as a third pillar too.

As challenges change, managers’ role does too

The environmental, economic and social challenges that European managers, professionals and policy-makers currently have to face are characterized by their multi-dimensionality, interconnectedness and urgency (cf. VUCA). Even though these contemporary issues are recognised by senior leaders, as the Global Risks Report 2019 has illustrated, the current paradigm in management education and business practice continues to be centered solely around shareholder value. It is therefore important to develop a European model of sustainable leadership and management. The EU’s commitment to the Sustainable Development Goals, the implementation of the Paris agreement and various other European Commission and social dialogue objectives call to action at operational levels, including in the workplace.

However, only few companies have a unified sustainability strategy and even fewer have followed-up with actions. According to CEC’s “Managers in Europe: today and tomorrow” report, many companies are yet far from reducing their emissions and operational waste significantly. Furthermore, sustainability remains often a departmentalized concern within companies and are only seldom integrated to core business functions such as strategy. In a world of interdependence, where information is key, it is important to develop systemic thinking skills, alongside social and emotional skills needed in people management. Digitalisation will make control-and-command types of management superfluous.

Against that background, the sustainable leadership project aims to provide managers and professionals, some of the key drivers for better social and environmental performance, with the necessary skills to deliver on some of the EU’s main priorities for a sustainable development of the economy. It does so in two ways. First, by identifying generic sustainable leadership skills (procedural dimension). And second, by enhancing managers’, professionals’ and manager trade unions’ capacities in the sustainability dimensions, exemplified within the domains of the circular economy and fair working conditions (chapter II of the European Pillar of Social Rights) as two application domains for sustainable leadership (material dimension).

Please find the work programme of the project here.

Please find the Sustainable Leadership Guidelines by CEC here.