The Growth Paradox

“Whatever is not growing is dying”

Really?  This provocative statement, attributed to various famous people, is accepted by many as an axiom of life and business.  If a business is not increasing in revenue and size, then it is stagnant and on the path to eventual decline and disaster.

We expect our country to grow in economic output.  We expect our population to expand.  We expect our productivity to increase.  Europe and Japan are considered to be in jeopardy because their populations are not increasing, but rather are slowly decreasing.

Every business measures itself by growth - revenue and profit year over year.  And when a business seems to have reached a saturation stage in its current product, then it embarks upon new products or services.  Starbucks, not content to be the ubiquitous coffee shop, begins serving wine.  Uber expands into public transportation.  Amazon becomes a web services and cloud provider.

This mantra of growth may seem logical on one level.  Growth is change and we human beings seem to be addicted to change.   When things stay the same, we get bored and depressed.  We need new challenges and new vistas to inspire us.

But does change always have to equate to growth?  If one accepts that personal growth really means change then that opens up multiple avenues that do not necessarily imply something becoming larger or increasing.  One can vastly alter one’s world without being part of something that is ‘growing’.

The problem with growth is that it ultimately impinges on something or reaches some limiting point.  Growth can eventually begin to damage both the thing that is growing and its environment.  Moreover, the growth of one thing can harm or even destroy the existence of another thing.  There is certainly a balance in nature that can be damaged by growth, and there is often also a balance in the affairs of humans that can be similarly destructive.

The growth of Walmart is a good example.  Walmart brought endless availability of goods and cheap prices to communities throughout America.  But its growth destroyed the small stores that previously thrived and may have been a contributing factor in the demise of small town America.  Amazon did the same to bookstores and is now leading the Internet’s general annihilation of brick and mortar establishments.

This growth is fueled by the societal imperative to acquire more material things, i.e. to consume, and to live ever more exotic lives.  This is why the Consumer Confidence Index is one of the most important statistics of our economy.

On one level all of this growth is the ‘march of progress’.   But on another level it can be deeply disruptive and perhaps ultimately harmful to society and the world at large.

The growth in population in many countries is a major threat to survival.  The growth in energy demand is the major contributor to global warming.  The growth in disposable items (plastic bottles, bags, etc.) is accelerating the pollution of oceans, animal habitats and human living spaces.  The growth in social media is contributing to the radicalization of society.  The growth in mega-corporations is contributing to social and political turmoil.  The growth in automation is causing a loss of middle-class jobs and increasing the disparity in wealth.

Why is growth such a prized attribute?  I suppose it is somewhat natural to want to grow things, to seek expansion.  Growth is a sign of success in most ventures.  Our oldest myths and religions extoll the virtues of growth.  “And you, be ye fruitful, and multiply; bring forth abundantly in the earth, and multiply therein.” (Genesis).  But like many of the long-prized assumptions of our civilization, this exhortation may have outlasted its relevance.

Is a business truly doomed to failure if it is content to stay a certain size?  Is a land necessarily in decline if its population decreases rather than increases? I suspect that the growth axiom is not nearly as axiomatic as one might imagine!

We cannot control or even really discourage the allegiance to change.  We have learned that any dictatorial or centralized planning and directives are unlikely to be successful.  But perhaps we can slowly impact the extent to which change is interpreted as growth.  On a personal level, we can certainly ‘grow’ in many ways without acquiring more or demanding more of the earth’s resources.  Learning new things, experiencing the fullness of the existing natural world, interacting with one another in innovative ways, and creating new non-material activities can slowly take the place of our acquisitive habits.

And in the business world, perhaps an investor consciousness can be cultivated that prioritizes long term sustainability and societal harmony as goals over short term profitability.

If we human beings are going to survive into the next century then our ‘growth’ will certainly have to be curtailed in some respects.  It will require changes in lifestyle, in our daily routine, and in our mindset.  But with our minds, bodies and souls freed from the need to constantly get bigger and acquire more possessions, perhaps we will find that we are actually ‘growing’ in a more sustainable and pleasant manner.