Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 138, Issue 3, pp 401–416 | Cite as

The ‘Biophilic Organization’: An Integrative Metaphor for Corporate Sustainability

  • David R. Jones


This paper proposes a new organizational metaphor, the ‘Biophilic Organization’, which aims to counter the bio-cultural disconnection of many organizations despite their espoused commitment to sustainability. This conceptual research draws on multiple disciplines such as evolutionary psychology and architecture to not only develop a diverse bio-cultural connection but to show how this connection tackles sustainability, in a holistic and systemic sense. Moreover, the paper takes an integrative view of sustainability, which effectively means that it embraces the different emergent tensions. Three specific tensions are explored: efficiency versus resilience, organizational versus personal agendas and isomorphism versus institutional change. In order to illustrate how the Biophilic Organization could potentially provide a synthesis strategy for such tensions, healthcare examples are drawn from the emerging fields of Biophilic Design in Singapore and Generative Design in the U.S.A. Finally, an example is provided which highlights how a Taoist cultural context has impacted on a business leader in China, to illustrative the significance of a transcendent belief system to such a bio-cultural narrative.


Biophilic organisation Sustainability Generative design Biophilic design Taoism 


  1. Alexander, A. (2006). A Daoist renaissance. Resurgence (January/February), 17–19.Google Scholar
  2. Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital. (2012). Submission to The Caritas Project Generative Space Award Enabling Health: Everybody. Chicago, IL: Everywhere.Google Scholar
  3. Barlow, C. (1997). Green space, green time: The way of science. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barry, D., & Elmes, M. (1997). Strategy retold: Toward a narrative view of strategic discourse. Academy of Management Review, 22, 429–451.Google Scholar
  5. Beatley, T. (2011). Biophilic Cities: Integrating nature into urban design and planning. Washington, DC: Island Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beatley, T. (2012). Singapore: City in a garden. Biophilic Cities. Accessed July 23, 2014, from
  7. Beatley, T. (2014). Hospital in a garden. University of Virginia. Accessed October 10, 2014, from
  8. Beech, N., Burns, H., de Caestecker, L., MacIntosh, R., & MacLean, D. (2004). Paradox as invitation to act in problematic change situations. Human Relations, 57(10), 1313–1332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bergs, J. A. (2002). Effect of healthy workplaces: Office work, well-being, and productivity. Amersfoort: Green Solar Architecture.Google Scholar
  10. Best, S., & Kellner, D. (1997). The postmodern turn. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  11. Birdwhistell, J. D. (2001). Ecological questions for Daoist thought: Contemporary issues and ancient texts. In N. J. Girardot, J. Miller, & L. Xiaogan (Eds.), Daoism and ecology: Ways within a cosmic landscape. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Birkin, F., Cashman, A., Koh, S. C. L., & Liu, Z. (2010). New sustainable business models in China. Business Strategy and the Environment, 18, 64–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Callinicos, A. (1995). Theories and narratives. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  14. Carolan, M. S. (2006). The values and vulnerabilities of metaphors within the environmental sciences. Society and Natural Resources, 19, 921–930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Carpenter, S., Walker, B., Anderies, J. M., & Abel, N. (2001). From metaphor to measurement: Resilience of what to what? Ecosystems, 4(8), 765–781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chen, M. (2002). Transcending paradox: The Chinese ‘Middle Way’ perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 19(2–3), 179–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cooper, A. (2008, July 14). The nature of design. Pacific Standard Magazine. Accessed July 10, 2013, from
  18. Cornelissen, J. P., & Kafouros, M. I. (2008). The emergent organization: Primary and complex metaphors in theorizing about organizations. Organization Studies, 29(7), 957–978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cramer, J. (2005). Company learning about corporate social responsibility. Business Strategy and the Environment, 14, 255–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. De Certeau, M. (1984). The practice of everyday life. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  21. Dey, P., & Steyaert, C. (2007). The troubadours of knowledge: Passion and invention in management education. Organization, 3, 437–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Durlabhji, S. (2004). The Tao of organization behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 52(4), 401–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dyllick, T., & Hockerts, K. (2002). Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment, 11, 130–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fenwick, T. (2007). Developing organizational practices of ecological sustainability: A learning perspective. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 28(7), 632–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. François, C. (2006). Transdisciplinary unified theory. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 23, 617–624.Google Scholar
  26. Gao, J., & Bansal, P. (2013). Instrumental and integrative logics in business sustainability. Journal of Business Ethics, 112(2), 241–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gherardi, S. (1999). Learning as problem-driven or learning in the face of mystery? Organization Studies, 20(1), 101–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hahn, T., & Figge, F. (2011). Beyond the bounded instrumentality in current corporate sustainability research: Toward an inclusive notion of profitability. Journal of Business Ethics, 104(3), 325–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hahn, T., Pinkse, J., Preuss, L., & Figge, F. (2014). Tensions in corporate sustainability: Towards an integrative framework. Journal of Business Ethics. doi: 10.1007/s10551-014-2047-5.Google Scholar
  30. Heerwagen, J., & Bloom, M. F. (2011). The Resilient Workplace. Accessed September 13, 2013, from
  31. Hill, J. (1998). The illegal architect. London: Black Dog.Google Scholar
  32. Hillier, B. (1996). Space is the machine: A configurational theory of architecture. Cambridge York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Hyman, D., & Sage, W. (2005). Through the Tax Code: Status or conduct? Accessed August 13, 2014, from
  34. Ip, P. K. (2008). The challenge of developing a business ethics in China. Journal of Business Ethics, 88(1), 211–224.Google Scholar
  35. Johnson, I. (2010). The rise of the Tao. The New York Times. Accessed May 10, 2010, from;pagewanted=all&%2359;emc=rss&pagewanted=all&.
  36. Jones, D. R. (2012). Looking through the ‘Greenwashing glass cage’ of the green league table towards the sustainability challenge for UK universities. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 25(4), 630–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kahn, P. H., Jr, Friedman, B., Gill, B., Hagman, J., Severson, R. L., Freier, N. G., et al. (2008). A plasma display window? The shifting baseline problem in a technologically-mediated natural world. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28, 192–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kardash, T. (1998). Daoismthe Wu‐Wei Principle. Accessed April 10, 2013, from
  39. Kellert, S. R. (1997). Kinship to mastery: Biophilia in human evolution and development. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  40. Kellert, S. (2004). Beyond LEED: From low environmental impact to restorative environmental design. Keynote address. In Greening Rooftops for SUSTAINABLE Communities conference. Sponsored by Green Roofs for Healthy Cities, Toronto, CA and City of Portland, Portland.Google Scholar
  41. Kellert, S. (2012). Birthright: People and nature in the modern world. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Kellert, S., Heerwagen, J. H., & Mador, M. L. (2008). Biophilic design. New Jersey: Wiley.Google Scholar
  43. Kellert, S. R., & Wilson, E. O. (1993). The biophilia hypothesis. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  44. Koolhaas, R. (1995). S, M, L, XL. New York: Monacelli Press.Google Scholar
  45. Korhonen, J., & Seager, T. P. (2008). Beyond eco-efficiency: A resilience perspective. Business Strategy and Environment, 17, 411–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kornberger, M., & Clegg, S. (2004). Bringing space back in: Organizing the generative building. Organization Studies, 25(7), 1095–1114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kraemer, K. (2006). World scriptures: An introduction to comparative religions. Marwah: Paulist Press.Google Scholar
  48. Lau, D. C., & Ames, R. T. (1998). Yuan Dao: Tracing Dao to its source. New York: Ballantine.Google Scholar
  49. Leach, M. (1998). Culture and sustainability. In L. Emmerji & P. Streeton (Eds.), World Culture Report. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.Google Scholar
  50. Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  51. Lin, L.-H., Ho, Y.-L., & Lin, W.-H. E. (2013). Confucian and Taoist work values: An Exploratory study of the Chinese transformational leadership behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 113(1), 91–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Lips-Wiersma, M., & Morris, L. (2009). Discriminating between ‘meaningful work’ and the ‘management of meaning’. Journal of Business Ethics, 88, 491–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lozano, R., & Huisingh, D. (2011). Inter-linking issues and aspects in sustainability reporting. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19, 99–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lozano, R., Lukman, R., Lozano, F. J., Huisingh, D., & Zilahy, G. (2010). Jumping Sustainability Meme. SD transfer from society to universities. Paper presented at the Environmental Management for Sustainable Universities, Delft.Google Scholar
  55. Mass, J. (2011). Take a hike! How attention restorative theory shows that nature sharpens the mind. Ode for Intelligent Optimists, September, 2011.Google Scholar
  56. Macnaughten, P., & Urry, J. (1998). Contested natures. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  57. Marcus, C. C., & Barnes, M. (1995). Gardens in healthcare facilities: Uses, therapeutic benefits, and design recommendation. University of California Berkeley: The Center for Health Design.Google Scholar
  58. Mathews, F. (2011). Towards a deeper philosophy of biomimicry. Organization and Environment, 20(10), 1–24.Google Scholar
  59. McGregor, S. L. T. (2004). The nature of transdisciplinary research and practice. Kappa Omicron Nu Human Sciences Working Paper Series. East Lansing, MI: Kappa Omicron Nu.Google Scholar
  60. Midttun, A. (2007). Corporate responsibility from a resource and knowledge perspective: Towards a dynamic reinterpretation of C(S)R: Are corporate responsibility and innovation compatible or contradictory? Corporate Governance, 4(2), 401–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Miller, J. (2003). Daoism: A short introduction. Oxford: Oneworld.Google Scholar
  62. Monteiro, M., & Keating, E. (2009). Managing misunderstandings: The role of language in interdisciplinary scientific collaboration. Sci. Commun., 31, 6–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Newman, P. (2013). Biophilic urbanism: A case study on Singapore. Australian Planner, 51(1), 47–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Nietzsche, F. (1968). The will to power. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  65. Nparks. (2012). Skyrise Greenery Incentive Scheme. National Parks Board, Government of Singapore. Accessed January 7, 2015, from
  66. Nunez, M. C. (2012). Sustainability and spirituality: A transdisciplinary perspective. In B. Nicolescu (Ed.), Transdisicplinarity and sustainability (pp. 102–110). Lubbock, TX: Atlas Publishing.Google Scholar
  67. Paper, J. (2001). “Daoism” and “Deep Ecology”: Fantasy and potentiality. In N. J. Girardot, J. Miller, & L. Xiaogan (Eds.), Daoism and ecology: Ways within a cosmic landscape. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Penker, M. (2008). Governing Austrian landscapes: Shifts along the private–public divide. In T. Sikor (Ed.), Public and private in natural resource governance: A false dichotomy? (pp. 89–106). London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  69. Porter, J. M. (2003). The Dao of Star Wars. Atlanta: Brumby Holdings Inc.Google Scholar
  70. Rahschulte, T. (2010). Virtues for leading change. The Journal of Virtues & Leadership, 1(1), 15–24.Google Scholar
  71. Rudofsky, B. (1964). Architecture without architects: A short introduction to non pedigreed architecture. London: Academy Editions.Google Scholar
  72. Ruga, W. (2013). Two projects named generative space award Recipients. Medical Construction and Design. Accessed December 6, 2014, from
  73. Ruiz, F. (2012, July 26). Biophilia becomes a design standard. EcoHome Magazine. Accessed August 4, 2014, from
  74. SBEnrc. (2012). Can biophilic urbanism deliver strong economic and social benefits in cities? An economic and policy investigation into the increased use of natural elements in urban design. Sustainable Built Environment National Research Centre (SBEnrc), Curtin University and Queensland University of Technology.Google Scholar
  75. Schutz, J. (1999). Organising diversity. In J. Kohn, J. M. Gowdy, F. Hinterberger, & J. van der Straaten (Eds.), Sustainability in question: The search for a conceptual framework (pp. 101–123). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
  76. Shrivastava, P., & Ivanaj, S. (2012). Transdisciplinary art, technology, and management for sustainable enterprise. In B. Nicolescu (Ed.), Transdisicplinarity and sustainability (pp. 112–128). Lubbock, TX: Atlas Publishing.Google Scholar
  77. Shrivastava, P., & Persson, S. (2014). A theory of strategy—learning from China from walking to sailing. Management, 17(1), 38–61.Google Scholar
  78. Singapore Design Council. (2011). President’s Design Award 2011. Singapore: Khoo Teck Puat Hospital. Accessed August 10, 2014, from
  79. Singer, P. (1995). How are we to live?. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
  80. Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 381–403.Google Scholar
  81. Sng, P. L. (2011). In what way can green building contribute to human wellness in the Singapore context? Singapore: National University of Singapore.Google Scholar
  82. Starkey, K., & Crane, A. (2003). Toward green narrative: Management and the evolutionary epic. Academy of Management Review, 28(2), 220–237.Google Scholar
  83. Steyaert, C. (2006). Cities as heterotopias and third spaces: The example of ImagiNation, the Swiss Expo 02. In Space, organizations and management theory (pp. 248-265). Copenhagen: Liber & Copenhagen Business School Press.Google Scholar
  84. Sundaramurthy, C., & Lewis, M. (2003). Control and collaboration: Paradoxes of governance. Academy of Management Review, 28(3), 397–415.Google Scholar
  85. Taylor, S. S., & Hansen, H. (2005). Finding form: looking at the field of organizational aesthetics. Journal of Management Studies, 42(6), 1211–1232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Terrapin Bright Green, LLC. (2012). The economics of Biophilia: Why designing with nature in mind makes financial sense. Washington, DC: Terrapin Bright Green.Google Scholar
  87. Thayer, J. F., Verkuil, B., Brosschot, J. F., Kampschroer, K., West, A., Sterling, C., et al. (2010). Effects of the physical work environment on physiological measures of stress. European Journal of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation, 17, 431–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. The Economist. (2013, August). China and the environment: The East is grey. Google Scholar
  89. Toropov, B., & Hansen, C. (2002). The Complete Idiot’s guide to Daoism. Indianapolis: Alpha Books.Google Scholar
  90. Ulrich, R. S. (1993). Biophilia, biophobia, and natural landscapes. In S. R. Kellert & E. O. Wilson (Eds.), The Biophilia hypothesis (pp. 73–137). Washington DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  91. Venturi, R. (1966). Complexity and contradiction in architecture. London: Architectural Press.Google Scholar
  92. Waistel, J. (2012). The way of environmental preservation and restoration. In Buddhist virtues in social and economic development conference. Google Scholar
  93. Wang, L., & Juslin, H. (2009). The impact of Chinese culture on corporate social responsibility: The harmony approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 88, 433–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Warren, S. (2002). Creating creativity: The organizational manipulation of aesthetics in a web design department. The Pink Machine Papers, 9(2), Stockholm.Google Scholar
  95. Wheatley, M. (1999). Leadership and the new science. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.Google Scholar
  96. Wilson, E. O. (1978). On human nature. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  97. Wilson, E. O. (1984). Biophilia: The human bond with other species. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  98. Winnicott, D. W. (1971). Playing and reality. London: Tavistock Publications.Google Scholar
  99. Yen, T. S. (2012). The practice of integrated design: The case study of Khoo Teck Puat Hospital, Singapore. Masters Dissertation, Nottingham University.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Aberdeen Business SchoolRobert Gordon UniversityAberdeenScotland, UK

Personalised recommendations