I recently heard Feike Sijbesma, CEO of DSM, say this. And I thought it was a really nice way of looking at things from a different perspective. As I write this, the COP30 climate summit is getting underway in Brazil. Ten years ago, the international community agreed to limit global warming to well below 2 degrees. But the outlook remains bleak. Greenhouse gas emissions seem to be rising rather than falling. It’s high time we took Feike’s statement beyond the political arena and, en masse, followed his example of how he has embraced the triple P philosophy within one of the Netherlands’ largest organizations. In this blog, I’d like to explain why Rvdb has also incorporated the triple P philosophy into its Human Experience manifesto.

Predatory mindset

First, let me provide some context. The capitalist, neoliberal thinking of recent decades has set the tone for self-interested thinking and the idea that “you get what you give.” This has resulted in mass consumption, the notion that “greed is good,” and a focus on profit maximization. I like to call this “extractive thinking.” This focus on endless growth is now taking its toll. Growth is not infinite—it is limited. Because it’s not just our planet that turns out to have limits; we humans do, too. We are exploiting our resources.

In recent years, there has been widespread attention on the dark side of our economic system—think of extremely polluting or degrading industries that have come under fire. When it comes to cheap clothing in our shopping districts, we all know by now that exploitation and inequality must be occurring somewhere in the supply chain. And that other cheap products are so cheap because manufacturers flout quality and environmental standards. That simply cannot be the norm. Business should never come at the expense of people or the planet. Rather, it must create value for both people and the planet. Every sector faces its own challenges in this regard, which may relate to inequality, pollution, mobilizing talent, or peace and security. Sustainable innovation as an organization should no longer even be a question, but a strategic necessity.

“Do No Harm” vs. “Do Good”

Fortunately, there has been a public debate on sustainable development for some time now. Many organizations begin their sustainability journey with the principle of “do no harm”—the realization that economic growth can no longer come at the expense of people or the planet. That is an important first step: putting an end to exploitation, both ecological and human. Consider, for example, reducing the ecological footprint by minimizing CO2 emissions. This approach focuses on avoiding negative impacts and examines the balance between what you take and what you give. Quite a few organizations have embraced this principle, but often still as an afterthought or a PR stunt.

But if you want to run a future-proof business, you have to dare to go further. The Triple P philosophy – people, planet, profit – encourages us to embrace “do good”: not just minimizing harm, but actively creating value. Here, the mindset shifts from avoidance to growth—toward creating a positive impact.

This philosophy was introduced by John Elkington in the late 1990s as a counterpoint to the one-sided focus on profit. In his book *Cannibals with Forks* (1997), he explains that development should ideally meet the needs of the present generation without compromising the opportunities of future generations. He argued that progress should be measured along three axes: people, the environment, and economic well-being.

Social Entrepreneurship by Rvdb

Given all the social and geopolitical developments we saw coming, Rvdb felt that, starting in 2020, it was no longer appropriate to focus solely on profit. With the introduction of the United Nations’ 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015, Rvdb also found a framework for sustainable business practices. Although it was difficult to embrace the SDGs in their entirety, they provided a macro-level framework within which the triple P philosophy provides guidance at the micro level. After all, the triple P philosophy can be seen as an organizational-level translation of what the SDGs aim to achieve on a global level: a future-proof balance between people, the environment, and the economy.

Social entrepreneurship became our new horizon. But this called for a new organizational model, one in which a social mission was placed at the core of the business strategy. People and the planet come before profit. Because as a social enterprise, you do indeed make a profit, but as a means—not as an end.

That social mission is: Bye-bye Human Resources, Hello Human Experience. We’re saying goodbye to a purely functional view of work, in which people are seen primarily as a means to an end (to maximize profits). Instead, we’re shifting to an approach in which people themselves are the starting point. Organizations and economic activities then exist first and foremost to serve people, and not the other way around. Because it’s only when people feel seen, heard, and inspired that there’s truly room for sustainable change. Guided by this mission, we also actively work to influence and collaborate with our clients, so that together we can champion responsible employment practices that have a positive impact on everyone. 

Being a social enterprise is therefore not the same as corporate social responsibility. While corporate social responsibility is often a supplement to a company’s core business, a social enterprise is the opposite: its social mission is its core business. A social enterprise is driven not only by profit, but by impact. Social enterprises are also market drivers: trailblazers that set the pace of change. Think of inspiring companies like Tony Chocolonely, Fairphone, Dopper, and Too Good to Go.

The Paradoxes of Triple P Practice

If social entrepreneurship seems so obviously good for people, the planet, and the economy, why doesn’t everyone just do it? The answer lies in the tensions and paradoxes that arise when you shift from traditional notions of success to a values-driven model.

Perhaps the biggest sticking point is that we want to reap the benefits of sustainability, but we don’t take the time to sow the seeds. You see this, for example, in the tension between short-term and long-term goals. Traditional entrepreneurship rewards quarterly results and shareholder returns. Social entrepreneurship requires investing in relationships, innovation, and social value—all of which only become apparent over the long term. This creates friction: impact can’t be measured in weeks, but profit can. Moreover, many leaders and executives have grown up within the economic paradigm. Change is painful, especially when it affects security or status.

Social entrepreneurship requires vision and conviction, but also business acumen. Be too idealistic, and you risk financial vulnerability. Be too business-oriented, and you lose credibility in your social mission. The trick is to strike a balance: idealism combined with a business model.

Speak louder, push harder, act faster

In many stories about social entrepreneurship, younger generations are cited as the reason for “having to do things differently.” But that misses the real point: social entrepreneurship works not because it attracts talent, but because it is based on human behavior as the driver of impact. You can only move toward the future of work with the people of today.

Of course, we’re also seeing a new generation entering the workforce. Our youngest employees seem to be making a stronger appeal to our moral responsibility to turn the tide (speak louder). We’ve also found that employees won’t come work for you if you’re focused solely on maximizing profits. This generation feels the urgency for change on issues like climate, inequality, and well-being. They ask questions, expect transparency, and want to contribute to something bigger than profit (push harder). But real change takes time: new skills, a new mindset, new structures. That’s precisely why we’re investing heavily in helping our people develop those skills. This allows us to accelerate progress not only for our own organization (act faster), but also for our clients’ organizations.

Multi-capitalist trading

From our own experience, we know better than anyone: embedding the triple P philosophy at the heart of your organization is no small feat. It’s a choice with consequences. Organizations that want to implement this must redesign their entire organization—just as we did: from KPIs to governance and compensation structures.

Furthermore, measuring impact requires new ways of measuring and reporting that take into account not only financial capital but also social, human, and natural capital. And as long as accountants, banks, and investors prioritize financial returns, there will be a structural tension between impact-driven action and conventional accountability.

Because what you measure shapes your behavior. Financial profit is unambiguous and quantitative. Social and environmental impact are often qualitative, complex, and diffuse. Some schools of thought even advocate for five types of capital: produced, human, intellectual, social, and natural capital. The annual report—or “annual fair report,” as Tony Chocolonely calls it—reports on these five types of capital. Adopting this approach truly lays the foundation for a shift from profit maximization and shareholder value to value for all stakeholders.

The Inevitable Choice

Ultimately, the question isn’t whether we can change, but whether we can afford not to. Because the reality is simple: on a dead planet, there will soon be nothing left to measure. No profits, no targets, no financial statements. Organizations that act according to the triple P philosophy are building something greater than themselves: a resilient economy that works for people and the planet rather than against them.

Feike Sijbesma put it aptly: we don’t inherit the world; we borrow it. And those who borrow must take care of it. The future belongs to organizations that understand this. Not because it sounds good in a manifesto, but because meaningful business is the only form of business that will have a right to exist in the future.