For decades, governments and institutions have clung to a deceptively simple idea: that maximising financial gains—GDP for countries, profits for firms, income for individuals—will automatically translate into collective wellbeing. This belief, embedded deeply within our governance systems, has shaped the very logic of policy-making. But mounting evidence tells a different story: the pursuit of financial income as the primary measure of success is not only failing to deliver wellbeing—it is accelerating the destruction of the very foundations that sustain it.
Against this backdrop, our new book, Beyond Profit: Purpose-Driven Leadership for a Wellbeing Economy, is a blueprint for the transformation of the market economy itself, and the organisations within it: a call for leaders at every level—macro, meso, and micro—to redesign governance so that decisions optimise long-term wellbeing for all, rather than short-term financial gains. And for policy makers in particular, its message is both urgent and unavoidable.
Why the current logic is failing
We argue that our world is governed by what we call Logic 1: a decision-making approach that places financial income at the centre of all institutions. Within this frame, governments chase GDP growth, organisations maximise profit, and citizens are expected to pursue higher incomes as the gateway to a good life. This model treats human, social and natural systems as infinite resources and sinks; as long as financial indicators rise, we label policies “successful,” even when the underlying wellbeing of society declines.
This is not merely a philosophical flaw—it’s a governance flaw. Logic 1 is a comlete system, with built-in incentives that reward harmful behaviour and punish sustainable choices. Policy makers operating inside this “box” may try to implement sustainability agendas, but quickly find themselves constrained by the same financial-first rules that created today’s crises.
The result is an economy in which “the basis of our wellbeing is systematically liquidated and turned into financial capital which we then celebrate as success”.
Why the usual fixes aren’t working
Recognising some of the shortcomings of Logic 1, governments have increasingly promoted environmental, social and governange (ESG) agendas, and stakeholder capitalism. This shift—which we call Logic 2—attempts to make the existing system less risky for financial income in the longer-term by internalising some environmental and social health into governance frames. Yet Logic 2 remains built on the same assumptions, including financial income being the primary goal.
The problem is structural. By failing to redesign the core governance frame for decisions, Logic 2 produces incrementalism where, instead, transformation is required. It pushes leaders to “do less harm” but cannot guide them to innovate for genuine wellbeing. As the book notes, Logic 2 depends on “very strong, informed, collaborative and persistent leadership,” but even the best leaders struggle because the system itself still makes truly sustainable decisions irrational.
Policy makers know this tension well: when the costs of protecting nature, communities, or workers appear to conflict with GDP growth or investor expectations, the default is deeply ironic. We always sacrifice wellbeing for economic growth – because we mistakenly believe this growth is the best route to wellbeing.
Logic 3: The paradigm shift policy makers must lead
The real invitation of Beyond Profit is to embrace Logic 3: a governance system that deliberately places long-term wellbeing for all people and planet at the centre of economic decision-making. Financial capital remains vital to any organisation —but as a means, not an end. Logic 3 is not utopian; it builds on decades of progress across three interconnected levels:
- MACRO: Wellbeing economy frameworks emerging in the OECD, the EU’s “GDP and Beyond” agenda and the Wellbeing Economy Governments (WEGo) partnership.
- MESO: The rise of purpose-driven businesses, legal innovations like Benefit Corporation laws, and governance standards such as ISO 37000 and the emerging ISO 37011 on Purpose-Driven Organisations.
- MICRO: The global movement of leaders, citizens and workers seeking to drive this multi-levelled system change and pursue meaningful, purpose-driven work instead of financially driven careers.
The transformation is already underway—but fragmented. All of us, and particularly policymakers, have a central role in connecting these dots, accelerating transition, and creating the enabling environment that Logic 3 requires. If not governing for the impacts we this, what?
Wellbeing as a meta-purpose for modern governance
We believe that societies need to clarify the universal “meta-purpose” of governance: long-term wellbeing for all. This foundational goal emerges everywhere: in the Brundtland definition of sustainability, in human rights law, in public-sector accounting standards, which are all emphasising wellbeing as government’s core purpose, and it is also enshrined in centuries of philosophical, spiritual and cultural wisdom. And for good reason – it is deeply logical. Only when we serve the good of the whole can we truly thrive. We argue that if the economy was governed directly for its purpose of enabling shared resources to optimise wellbeing for all, then “we would not need a word called sustainability”. The system would drive and protect wellbeing by design. Instead, we have built an economic machine that undermines its own stated objective by promoting short-term, often self-destructive pursuits with no oversight or accountability for the consequences. This has created a governance ‘lock-in’ that puts the problem and solution out of sight and makes it nearly impossible for leaders to correct course.
What policy makers can do now
Our book offers clear pathways for redesigning governance at the macro level:
1. Anchor policy in governance for wellbeing.
We assume governments are purpose-driven and governing for our collective long-term wellbeing (Logic 3) but the reality is they are more likely to be governed with Logic 1 or Logic 2. This requires a coherent shift across ministries, agencies and political cycles—moving beyond fragmented sustainability initiatives toward an integrated model of purpose-driven governance where Wellbeing Economies logically become the norm. International standards (ISO37000 and ISO37011) provide the detail we can lean on and help co-create.
2. Reclassify GDP from a goal to a parameter.
In a Wellbeing Economy, GDP should inform policy—not drive it. In some areas (e.g. defense) and under certain circumstances (e.g. the abuse of drugs), it could even be desirable to decrease GDP. Focusing success on how well long-term wellbeing for all is being generated and protected, and measuring success through wellbeing indicators (as dozens of countries are beginning to do) is the first step toward shifting policy-making.
3. Build national wellbeing accounting systems.
This includes multi-capital accounting, social and natural capital health measures, and thresholds that ensure foundational systems are not degraded.
4. Redesign fiscal policy for wellbeing.
Budgets, taxation, and public spending must be evaluated on their contribution to long-term wellbeing rather than short-term revenue. Policies that drive financial income but create problems that destroy wellbeing which also costs money to fix, should never get approved. Policymakers need to be skilled in assessing this and exposing flawed proposals.
A decisive moment for public leadership
Policy makers today face an unprecedented choice. If they choose to continuing operating inside the Logic 1 box then this will guarantee deeper crises: ecological, social, economic and democratic. Tweaking the system through Logic 2 approaches may buy time, but will not deliver the structural change required. The true challenge—and the true opportunity—is to lead the transition to Logic 3: to rewire the governance of our economies, institutions and leadership cultures around the only goal that can guide humanity toward a sustainable future: long-term wellbeing for all. If not this, what? If not now, when?
