Less is More Minimalism as an Approach to Sustainable Business-Making in the Fashion Industry Lena Botzem Sarah Schimmer - Diva-portal.org
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Less is More −
Minimalism as an Approach to Sustainable Business-
Making in the Fashion Industry
Lena Botzem
Sarah Schimmer
Leadership and Organisation
Degree of Master of Arts (60 credits) with a Major in Leadership and Organisation
Master Thesis with a focus on Leadership and Organisation for Sustainability (OL646E), 15 Credits
Spring 2021
Supervisor: Helgi-Valur FridrikssonTitle: Less is More −
Minimalism as an Approach to Sustainable Business-Making in the Fashion Industry
Authors: Lena Botzem, Sarah Schimmer
Main Field of Study: Leadership and Organisation
University: Malmö University, Department of Urban Studies at the Faculty of Culture and Society
Subject: Master Thesis with a focus on Leadership and Organisation for Sustainability (OL646E),
15 Credits
Semester: Spring 2021
Supervisor: Helgi-Valur FridrikssonAbstract
Research on minimalism on the individual level shows the concept to be linked to ecological
sustainability by applying methods such as reduction of consumption and valuing of product quality
over quantity. In the fashion industry, concepts like ‘capsule wardrobe’ propose a reduced but high-
quality, timeless wardrobe. It challenges the complex and fast-paced fashion industry with its numerous
collections, overproduction and overconsumption. The application of minimalism on the business level
in the fashion industry has not been researched yet. Therefore, we aimed to explore how minimalism is
perceived and applied on the organisational level in the fashion industry and its contribution to
ecological sustainability. Based on a developed theoretical framework and data gathered through eleven
semi-structured interviews, a practical framework for minimalism as a business strategy is presented. It
represents a value-based approach to business by incorporating customers, the organisation and the
supply chain. Furthermore, organisational minimalism is not only efficiency-increasing and waste-
reducing but also a way to do as little harm as possible, to consume critically while still operating in the
existing system. The practical framework can be used to guide companies to implement minimalism as
a driver for sustainability in business-making. With this outcome, we contribute to making the fashion
industry more sustainable and reaching the Sustainable Development Goals 8, 9, and 12.
Key words: business strategy, minimalism, sustainability, fashion industry, fair fashion, business
organisationTable of Contents
1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1. Background.............................................................................................................................. 1
1.2. Problem Discussion and Previous Research ............................................................................ 2
1.2.1. Fashion and Sustainability ............................................................................................... 3
1.2.2. Fashion and Minimalism ................................................................................................. 3
1.2.3. Minimalism and Sustainability ........................................................................................ 4
1.2.4. Minimalism and Business ................................................................................................ 5
1.3. Relevance ................................................................................................................................ 6
1.4. Research Gap and Purpose ...................................................................................................... 6
1.5. Research Questions ................................................................................................................. 7
1.6. Layout ...................................................................................................................................... 7
2. Theoretical Foundation .................................................................................................................... 8
2.1. Explanation and Use of Terms ................................................................................................ 8
2.1.1. Choice of Minimalism over Lean Management .............................................................. 8
2.1.2. Minimalism: Definitions and Distinction ........................................................................ 8
2.1.3. Sustainability ................................................................................................................. 10
2.1.4. Fair/Sustainable Fashion................................................................................................ 10
2.2. Presentation of Relevant Theories ......................................................................................... 11
2.2.1. Degrowth ....................................................................................................................... 11
2.2.2. Organisational Structure: Complexity, Formalisation and Centralisation ..................... 12
2.2.3. Sustainable Supply Chain Management, Supply Chain Integration and Sustainability
Assessment .................................................................................................................... 13
2.2.4. (Inter-) Organisational Learning .................................................................................... 14
2.2.5. Lean Management ......................................................................................................... 15
2.2.6. Minimalism as a Design Theory .................................................................................... 15
2.3. Connection of Theories and Topics & Presentation of Theoretical Framework ................... 16
3. Methodology.................................................................................................................................. 19
3.1. Research Strategy .................................................................................................................. 19
3.2. Research Design and Methods .............................................................................................. 19
3.3. Data Selection, Collection & Analysis .................................................................................. 19
3.4. Limitations............................................................................................................................. 20
3.5. Reliability and Trustworthiness ............................................................................................. 21
3.6. Ethical Considerations ........................................................................................................... 21
4. Findings ......................................................................................................................................... 22
4.1. Presentation of Object of Study ............................................................................................. 22
4.2. Empirical Evaluation of Data ................................................................................................ 23
4.2.1. Perception and Application of Minimalism Tools and Strategies ................................. 23
4.2.2. Engagement with Minimalism on different Levels ....................................................... 265. Analytical Evaluation of Data ....................................................................................................... 28
5.1. Degrowth ............................................................................................................................... 28
5.2. Organisational Structure ........................................................................................................ 28
5.3. Sustainable Supply Chain Management, Supply Chain Integration and Sustainability
Assessment ............................................................................................................................... 29
5.4. (Inter-) Organisational Learning ............................................................................................ 30
5.5. Lean Management ................................................................................................................. 30
5.6. Minimalism as a Design Theory ............................................................................................ 31
6. Discussion and Conclusion............................................................................................................ 33
6.1. Revision of the Theoretical Framework – The Practical Framework .................................... 33
6.2. Discussion.............................................................................................................................. 35
6.3. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 37
List of References ..................................................................................................................................... I
Appendix A: Enquiry with Companies .................................................................................................. X
Appendix B: General Interview Guide .................................................................................................. XI
Appendix C: Participant Consent Form.............................................................................................. XIII
Appendix D: Exemplary Interview Transcript (Interview #7) ........................................................... XIVList of Abbreviations Large Enterprise LE Life Cycle Assessment LCA Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment LCSA Research Question RQ Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprise SME Sustainable Development Goal SDG Sustainable Supply Chain Management SSCM Sustainability Impact Assessment SIA Supply Chain Integration SCI Supply Chain Management SCM Triple Bottom Line TBL Voluntary Simplicity VS List of Tables Table 1: Traits, Benefits & Values related to Minimalism ...................................................................... 5 Table 2: Object of Study (Oral Interviews) ........................................................................................... 22 Table 3: Object of Study (Written Interviews) ...................................................................................... 22 List of Figures Figure 1: Key Topics & Research Gap.................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2: Nested Model of Sustainability (as seen in Giddings et al., 2002) ........................................ 10 Figure 3: Connection of Key Topics & Theories .................................................................................. 16 Figure 4: Theoretical Framework .......................................................................................................... 17 Figure 5: Practical Framework .............................................................................................................. 33
Glossary
Approach A way of doing or thinking to proceed towards a goal or solution
A firm’s general plan to achieve their set organisational goals, mission
Business Strategy
and vision
Clothing that is produced under fair working conditions, with the most
Fair Fashion sustainable options used possible (in terms of materials, manufacturing,
etc.); Interchangeably used with the term sustainable fashion
A company that produces and sells clothing items under their own, unique
Fashion Brand
name; Interchangeably used with fashion label
A company that produces and sells clothing items under their own, unique
Fashion Label
name; Interchangeably used with fashion brand
The business making and selling clothing, includes the design, sourcing of
Fashion Industry materials, manufacturing processes, distribution, marketing, and selling of
the products
Method Procedure to achieve a set goal or objectives
A sustainable and voluntary living approach with the aim to reduce
Minimalism
distractions and excess in order to gain more freedom and well-being
A sustainable and voluntary business strategy approach with the aim to
Minimalism on the
operate more efficiently, involving eliminating excess to gain more
organisational Level
freedom along the whole supply chain and within daily operations
Clothing that is produced under fair working conditions, with the most
Sustainable Fashion sustainable options used possible (in terms of materials, manufacturing,
etc.); Interchangeably used with the term fair fashion
Meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of
Sustainability future generations to meet their own needs (adopted from the Brundtland
Report)
A specific instrument/mean used to achieve a certain aim or task serving
Tool
the strategy
Acknowledgements
Many people supported us during this intense year of studying and the last weeks of writing this thesis.
It might be unusual, but first, we thank each other for being an efficient, hard-working, and
understanding, great thesis team. Furthermore, we thank our supervisor Helgi-Valur Fridiksson who
supported us with precious tips and supervisions and motivated us to always critically reflect on our
work and every feedback we get. We also thank all professors and lecturers of the SALSU programme
for an interesting, educative, fun and challenging year. Last but not least, a huge thank you goes out to
the SALSU gang, who always stood together, motivated and supported each other. Due to Covid-19, we
have not met everyone in person, but our experiences in the last months will sustainably connect us.1. Introduction
Tracing back the steps a garment has gone through until it ends up in a customer’s wardrobe clearly
shows the complexity and globalisation of nowadays fashion industry. Resource and clothing production
takes place all over the world until the garments are sent to the respective markets and are sold on- or
offline. Alongside the complexity, another characteristic of the industry is its speed. With several
thousand new styles in shops every week (Monroe, 2021) and a turnover of 162 billion Euros in 2020
(The European Apparel and Textile Confederation, 2020), the European fashion industry has a high
global environmental, social, and economic impact, although sales shrunk by 22% to 35% due to the
Covid-19 pandemic in 2020. A call for a more sustainable fashion industry is on the rise (BOF &
McKinsey & Company, 2020), but most of the industry still follows profit maximisation and the fast
fashion concept. In the past years, fast fashion has caused severe environmental impacts. Due to the
fashion industry, 1.5 trillion litres of water are consumed, and 92 million tonnes of waste are produced
every year, causing 10% of global pollution (Niinimäki et al., 2020). Fast fashion also led to a satiety of
products, massive consumerism and impulse stimulation, which can cause mental and physical overload
and can be seen as a driver of the minimalism trend on an individual level. The concept of minimalism
includes a voluntary reduction of products and consumption to make space for more important aspects,
such as well-being (Kang et al., 2021). Minimalism applied on the fashion consumer side can either be
a change of style in the direction of clean shapes, high-quality materials and monochrome colour palettes
(Gubensek, 2017) or a change in wardrobe organisation towards a reduced number of pieces (Rees,
2016). Consequently, shifting the focus from quantity to high-quality and long-lasting products can
reduce consumerism, decelerate the fast fashion industry, and give rise to sustainable fashion brands.
We will analyse the perceptions and application possibilities of minimalism on an organisational level
in the fashion industry. As the fashion industry is in high need of change towards sustainability, we will
lift minimalism from an individual to an organisational level and evaluate how minimalism can pave the
way towards a higher degree of sustainability in the fashion industry.
1.1. Background
Minimalism on an individual level has been a lifestyle choice and a trend, which is growing, especially
among millennials (Pangarkar et al., 2021). Studies show how minimalism on an individual level is
linked to several positive benefits, such as autonomy, mental health, competence, and awareness
(Dopierała, 2017; Hurst et al., 2013; Lloyd & Pennington, 2020). It is seen as an own lifestyle that does
not entirely neglect consumerism but calls upon more conscious consumption patterns that value quality
and reduction over quantity and excess and contributes to a more sustainable lifestyle (Kang et al., 2021).
Applied to the organisational level of companies, minimalist practices can spread throughout the whole
organisation, from the allocation of resources, goal-settings, employees and finally, the entire business
culture (Manar Al Hinai, 2019), leading to efficiency, profitability, productivity and a clear focus on
vision and aim (Bodell, 2016). Therefore, one could claim the missing necessity of minimalism as a
business approach, as some processes and aims coincide with those stated in lean management and
production. However, both principles are not the same as minimalism follows a more holistic approach,
including environmental awareness in business operations that serve a more sustainable lifestyle (Kang
et al., 2021). Chapter 2.1.1. will further explain the differentiation of both business approaches.
To study minimalism in an organisational context, the fashion industry is a very suitable field for several
reasons. With 160 thousand companies and 1.5 million employees, the European textile and clothing
industry has a tremendous global impact (The European Apparel and Textile Confederation, 2020).
Alongside its high degree of globalisation and complexity, the textile industry is also known for being
one of the most harmful industries in the world (Gardetti & Muthu, 2020). It is reigned by trends and
collections. In a way, it can be seen as an opposing force to minimalism, as it creates new pieces of
clothing, consumption stimuli, and fashion is a highly consumed good in developed countries (Gardetti
& Muthu, 2020). Simultaneously, there is a growing percentage of fair and sustainable fashion on the
market, and more brands are trying to adopt less harmful business-making practices (The Business
Research Company, 2020). Some of those brands already advertise a minimalist approach to clothing
on an individual level, campaigning for ‘quality over quantity’ (Glore, 2020; Organic Basics, 2021).
1With minimalism as a critical approach towards consumerism and excess, it is highly interesting to apply
it to a vastly complex field of research. Minimalist practices, especially in supply and product
management, can support the industry’s recovery and lead it on a more ecologically sustainable path
(BOF & McKinsey & Company, 2021).
Based on the research about individual minimalism, we combine previous findings and first applications
of minimalism on an organisational level with the current state of the fashion industry, assuming that
minimalistic business practices lead to environmental awareness and sustainable changes throughout the
industry. Therefore, our study contributes to the achievements of several Sustainable Development
Goals (SDG) (United Nations, n.d.), mainly the following:
- SDG 8 and sub-goals 3 and 4: Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic
growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all
- SDG 9 and sub-goals 1, 2 and 4: Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and
sustainable industrialisation and foster innovation
- SDG 12 and sub-goals 2,4,5,6 and 8: Ensure sustainable consumption and production
patterns
1.2. Problem Discussion and Previous Research
In the following part, the main streams leading to this paper’s purpose are presented, using previous
research. Our main topics are minimalism, fashion, and sustainability, as illustrated in the figure below.
Since we aim to shift minimalism from an individual to an organisational level, it is essential to study
all three topics in a business organisation context. Based on the topics, the main streams create the
foundation for the examination towards finding answers to the research questions (RQs) and the analysis
of how minimalism can be linked on an organisational level in the fashion industry and lead to more
ecological sustainability. By highlighting the existing links between the studied topics and showing that
they have not been researched altogether before, we define the gap we aim to fill with our thesis. As
depicted in the figure below, the research gap evolves when combining the three main topics in a
business organisation context (see figure 1).
Figure 1: Key Topics & Research Gap
21.2.1. Fashion and Sustainability
As sustainable and fair fashion is a wide field of research, the following paragraphs will give the current
status quo of the fashion industry with regard to sustainability.
According to the Global Fashion Agenda et al. (2019), the fashion industry slightly improved its
environmental and social impact, however, with a slower pace than 2018 (Global Fashion Agenda et al.,
2019). The sustainability effort and progress of the fashion industry is measured with the Pulse Score
based on the Higg Index. It is measured from 0 to 100 points, and in 2019, the Pulse Score climbed from
38 points to 42 points, however with only two-thirds of the speed compared to 2018 (Global Fashion
Agenda et al., 2019). The industry’s movement towards more sustainability was mainly caused thanks
to small-size players in the mid-price segment and medium- and large-size players in the entry-price
segment (Global Fashion Agenda et al., 2019).
Focusing on the different steps within the fashion supply chain, the most significant sustainability-
related improvements were achieved in the areas of supply chain management (SCM), as well as
management and target-setting (Global Fashion Agenda et al., 2019). Within product development, an
average level of improvements and performance has been measured. At the same time, the fields of
packaging, transportation, distribution, retail, and use & end-of-use showed the lowest performance and
improvements (Global Fashion Agenda et al., 2019). Despite the overall progress of the fashion industry,
innovative and sustainable solutions need to be implemented faster to reach the set goals by the SDGs
and the Paris Agreement (Global Fashion Agenda et al., 2019). To prevent environmental disruption,
companies in the early stages of adopting sustainability practices have to focus on the critical enablers
of sustainable improvements such as clear communication streams, supply chain traceability,
standardised reporting frameworks, waste and emissions reduction, as well as efficient resource usage
(Global Fashion Agenda et al., 2019). Companies that already managed to set the base for more
sustainability have to target their used materials towards more sustainable and innovative alternatives,
develop fair wage systems, use the opportunities of digitalisation along the value chain, and create and
standardise circular fashion (Global Fashion Agenda et al., 2019). In general, “fashion companies must
join forces with suppliers, investors, regulators, NGOs, academia and consumers to create an ecosystem
that supports transformational innovation and disruptive business models” (Global Fashion Agenda et
al., 2019, p. 4).
Circular business models in the fashion industry are considered the key adjustment of shifting the
industry towards higher levels of environmental sustainability as circular models include a massive
waste reduction and more efficient use of resources (BOF & McKinsey & Company, 2021).
Furthermore, innovative consumption options have to be made available to customers, such as rental,
resale, repair options, while at the same time, negative stigmas that many customers connect with pre-
used garments have to be dismantled (BOF & McKinsey & Company, 2021).
According to the Global Fashion Agenda et al. (2019), the fashion industry needs a “deeper and more
systemic change” (Global Fashion Agenda et al., 2019, p. 1) to call itself sustainable.
1.2.2. Fashion and Minimalism
In the world of fashion design, minimalism has been a stable design theory since the 1980s, when it was
introduced and used to overcome gender stereotypes (Gubensek, 2017). The design was dominated by
clean cuts and pattern making, geometric forms, and a reduced and monochrome colour palette
(Gubensek, 2017). New and unusual fabrics were used and shifted the focus from the garment’s function
to its form and materials (Gubensek, 2017). In the 1990s, minimalism was no longer an innovation but
became mainstream by focusing on androgynous clothing representing the modern and working woman
(Gubensek, 2017). In the 21st century, with the economic crisis and the climate crisis highlighting the
instability of today’s society, economy, and environment, minimalism and reductionism in design and
purchasing behaviours are a possibility to still consume fashion, but more responsibly, focusing on
timeless qualitative pieces instead of quantity (Gubensek, 2017). Emphasis is laid on high-quality
investment pieces that are long-lasting and immune to occurring and changing trends (Harriet Walker,
32011). Being a trend in the 1980s, minimalism and reductionism nowadays “became a zeitgeist” (Harriet
Walker, 2011) and is a “means of progress and innovation” (Harriet Walker, 2011).
Reduced and more responsible fashion consumption patterns and minimalist but highly qualitative and
durable products, not just reflect on the design process of new garments. Especially since the Covid-19
pandemic, the fashion industry’s problems of overstocking and oversupply became apparent during the
numerous lockdowns (BOF & McKinsey & Company, 2021). The brands have to deal with
environmental problems and reduced inventory turnovers due to the oversupply and high inventory
levels, while also seeing the customers changing their buying behaviours towards the credo ‘less is more’
and implementing sustainability into their purchasing decisions (BOF & McKinsey & Company, 2021).
Fashion brands are forced to adapt to the changing needs and priorities. BOF and McKinsey (2021)
summarised three areas of the fashion supply that are crucial to adapt and change now. First, brands
should invest more into a detailed customer analysis and change towards a demand-led production model
to reduce oversupply and stock-keeping units (BOF & McKinsey & Company, 2021). Second, the
overall assortment complexity needs to be reduced by changing the traditional fashion schedule and
quitting smaller collections such as resort- and cruise collections (BOF & McKinsey & Company, 2021).
Third, research needs to be conducted to adapt the price-volume relation and achieve a balanced price
level by reducing discounts and focusing on an overall optimisation of prices (BOF & McKinsey &
Company, 2021). Minimalism and reductionism moved from the customer- to the brands-level, which
need to adapt their strategies and operations. This includes a strong focus on sustainability on both levels,
accelerating the shift towards circular fashion models (BOF & McKinsey & Company, 2021).
1.2.3. Minimalism and Sustainability
Conscious and critical consumption is part of minimalism (Dopierała, 2017; Kang et al., 2021;
Kraisornsuthasinee & Swierczek, 2018; Lloyd & Pennington, 2020). Sustainable consumption can be
related to this reduction approach, as sustainable consumption can go in different directions. It either
means consuming greener products, consuming less, or both (Kraisornsuthasinee & Swierczek, 2018).
Minimalism and its consumption patterns have mainly been studied on an individual level and as
personal lifestyle choices. In general, reduced consumption and production are more sustainable than
excessive materialism, as fewer resources are used and exhausted (Hurst et al., 2013; Kang et al., 2021;
Lloyd & Pennington, 2020).
Some researchers have examined the relationship between these minimalist lifestyle approaches and
sustainability. They found that characteristics of minimalists often go hand in hand with sustainability
values (Dopierała, 2017; Hurst et al., 2013; Kang et al., 2021; Kraisornsuthasinee & Swierczek, 2018;
Lloyd & Pennington, 2020; Massoudi & Vaidya, 2018). People that perceive themselves as minimalists
often also have a strong awareness of environmental issues and justice (Kraisornsuthasinee &
Swierczek, 2018). The pointers of minimalism contributing to sustainable lifestyle choices and
sustainable awareness were also examined from a natural science perspective (Massoudi & Vaidya,
2018). Their “initial hypothesis is that understanding, accepting and enacting simplicity in our daily
lives is key to achieving sustainability in the long run in all spheres of human activity” (Massoudi &
Vaidya, 2018, p. 7). With the verification of that hypothesis, Massoudi and Vaidya (2018) make a strong
statement about the need for simplicity and reduction to move towards sustainability. However, they do
not define what achievement of sustainability means to them.
Kang et al. (2021) see sustainability as a crucial part of minimalism and include it in their definition of
the term. Although they show that, within scientific contexts, sustainability is not as deeply rooted in
minimalism as it is in voluntary simplicity (VS), they see a strong link between minimalism and
environmental behaviour. A more in-depth discussion about VS and minimalism is provided in chapter
2.1.2. of this thesis. A reduction of consumption and a critical mindset towards purchasing new things
lead to more sustainable, ethical buying patterns since more time and research goes into decision-making
(Kang et al., 2021). Kang et al. (2021) see the possibilities of minimalism as a lifestyle and its high
standards influencing manufacturers towards more sustainable production patterns.
4Vice versa, studies show a connection between materialism and lacking concern about environmental
topics (Hurst et al., 2013; Lloyd & Pennington, 2020). Hurst et al. (2013) see a value conflict between
the pursuit of economic growth and environmentally friendly behaviours, which can be seen in
Schwartz’s ‘circumplex of values’ (Schwartz & Boehnke, 2004). Most mentioned studies connect
minimalism with specific traits, benefits or values (see table 1). In relation to sustainability, especially
a sense of ethics (Kraisornsuthasinee & Swierczek, 2018; Massoudi & Vaidya, 2018), critical
examination of consumption and general awareness of the planet were mentioned (Dopierała, 2017;
Hurst et al., 2013; Kang et al., 2021; Lloyd & Pennington, 2020). In that sense, a connection between
minimalism and sustainability is shown.
Table 1: Traits, Benefits & Values related to Minimalism
Authors Traits, benefits & values related to minimalism
Massoudi & Vaidya, 2018 Reliability & Stability
Ability to live meagerly
Ability to live creatively and finding Value
Living ethically
Lloyd & Pennington, 2020 Autonomy
Competence
Mental Space
(Ecological) Awareness
Positive Emotions
Dopierała, 2017 Ecology (and Vegetarianism)
Spirituality
Cooperation and Co-creation
Kraisornsuthasinee & Swierczek, External Concerns (e.g., environment, critical view on big corporations)
2018 Ethics & Morale
Spirituality
Kang et al., 2021 Self-Control
Focus on Life Goals and Values
Sustainable Living
Flourishing life
Contribution to mental Well-Being
1.2.4. Minimalism and Business
Concerning the connection of minimalism and business, our research led to the conclusion that there are
little to no scientific studies connecting the two topics. The few scientific articles on minimalism in
organisations are relatively old (Lumpkin & Dess, 1995; Miller, 1993). The core findings of Lumpkin
and Dess (1995) are that while simplification is beneficial in the early stages of an organisation, there is
a risk of having blind spots and overlooking essential issues later on. However, some practitioners share
their experiences implementing minimalist approaches to their organisations and the benefits they see
(Manar Al Hinai, 2019; Matsangou, 2017; Spawn, 2020). Minimalism in business primarily relates to
the minimisation of distractions, re-evaluating the core competencies and activities throughout the
organisation and its activities (Matsangou, 2017; Spawn, 2020). Some practitioners state that minimalist
principles have helped to “modernize and streamline” their organisation (Spawn, 2020). Matsangou
(2017) mentions the example of Apple and its former CEO Steve Jobs to pinpoint how minimalism and
simplicity in business can lead to great success:
“One of his [Steve Jobs] first moves was to completely eliminate whole divisions, and reduce
the product line to just four products: one desktop and one laptop for the casual user, and the
same for the professional user. That was the start of a course that would lead Apple to become
the most valuable brand in the world.” (Matsangou, 2017)
5To exemplify, Laura Spawn, CEO and co-founder of her business, reports several benefits that the
minimisation of distractions and self-assessment have brought with them (Spawn, 2020). Amongst those
are “greater resourcefulness and creativity”, more clarity and less distraction, “reduced stress throughout
the business hierarchy”, and “lowered operating costs” (Spawn, 2020). Manar Al Hinai (2019) mentions
similar benefits for organisations by cutting down the product range and making minimalism part of the
whole business culture. Streamlining the business activities comes with a constant re-evaluation of
practices and that “minimalism is about asking often-overlooked questions, such as ‘why are we doing
this?’ and ‘do we actually need this?’” (Matsangou, 2017). Matsangou (2017) states that bureaucracy
and big structures slow processes down, while a simplistic business approach enhances efficiency,
flexibility and freedom. Kang et al. (2021) see minimalist lifestyles potentially influencing businesses
to operate in more environmentally friendly ways. In that way, minimalism on an individual level can
be a chance for organisations to adapt and become more sustainable.
The review of the existing literature on the focus streams has shown that there are connections between
them. However, merging the streams has not been done yet. Therefore, the next chapters underpin the
relevance for research in the field of study, the purpose of this thesis and its RQs.
1.3. Relevance
Although sustainable and fair fashion is on the rise and highly discussed on social media, with 10.7M
posts for #sustainablefashion on Instagram (Instagram, 2021), platforms (e.g. Fashion Changers, 2021;
Utopia, 2021), and books (e.g. ‘Minimal Fashion’, Bronowski & Holtzheimer, 2018), the concept of fast
fashion including overproduction, -consumption and -stocking, connected to alarming environmental
impacts and working conditions still rules the industry (Monroe, 2021; Peters et al., 2021). Due to the
fast production of low-quality cheap garments outsourced to low-wage countries with low
environmental and social standards, the fast fashion industry causes numerous negative impacts along
the complex supply chain (Niinimäki et al., 2020). On the ecological side, this includes vast water- and
CO2-footprint due to fibre crops and production processes and steps in several different countries, many
and long transports, high use of hazardous chemicals and fertilisers, and high waste production in terms
of textiles, water, and energy, as well as inefficient resource usage (Kozlowski et al., 2012).
As minimalism already gained importance on the individual level and shows positive effects that include
emotional well-being and environmental awareness (Dopierała, 2017; Hurst et al., 2013; Kang et al.,
2021; Lloyd & Pennington, 2020), we assume that the advantages of using minimalism can also be
achieved on an organisational level. Kang et al. (2021) examined that a change in consumption and
purchasing patterns can “motivate manufacturers and producers to seek more sustainable modes of
production that accord with the minimalist lifestyle” (Kang et al., 2021, p. 811) and highlight that more
research about minimalism and its various contributions is needed.
1.4. Research Gap and Purpose
Based on the practical and theoretical background, the problem discussion explicates an existing
research gap between the topics of organisational minimalism, the fashion industry and ecological
sustainability applied to the business level. In contrast to lean management, minimalism is not
sufficiently studied on an organisational level. On top of that, the review of previous research made clear
that it has not been studied in application to the fashion industry before. The purpose of this paper is to
close this research gap by analysing how minimalism, being a holistic approach, is perceived and applied
on an organisational level in different fashion companies. This study includes different areas of
application, strategies and tools connected to minimalism and their contribution to ecological
sustainability in the fashion industry. New and adapted processes that lead towards environmental
awareness and sustainability in the fashion industry also support the reaching of the Paris Agreement
and the SDGs 8, 9, and 12. Our aim is to explore how minimalism is perceived and applied on the
organisational level in the fashion industry.
61.5. Research Questions
To close the research gap and serve the stated purpose, two main research questions are posed. In order
to explicate how minimalism is perceived and applied in fashion companies, we state the first research
question, including two subquestions. With the attempt to answer these questions, the two main topics
of minimalism and the fashion industry are connected to the third main topic of sustainability, with an
emphasis on the ecological aspect.
RQ1: What tools and strategies are connected to a minimalistic strategy in business making for
sustainability?
RQ1a: How are they applied in fashion companies?
RQ1b: How are they perceived from an individual point of view?
The second research question points out the different areas of a business and its environment relevant to
minimalism strategies and tools. Accordingly, this research question highlights the holistic approach of
minimalism applied in businesses and their contribution to ecological sustainability and awareness
creation.
RQ2: On which organisational levels are minimalism approaches applied and perceived as relevant?
1.6. Layout
In the following chapters, we present the theories connected to our body of research and expound on
how these theories relate to the studied topic. A developed theoretical framework shows how the theories
are intertwined and based upon each other. The approach and methodology to gathering primary and
secondary data are explained thoroughly. Finally, in the analytical part of this thesis, we bring our
theoretical research and the gathered primary data together and evaluate them empirically and
analytically to find answers to our research questions. Afterwards, we discuss our findings,
contradictions, develop a practical framework based on the theoretical framework, and reflect on our
research.
72. Theoretical Foundation
The following part gives the theoretical foundation for the presented research. It includes an explanation
of the most important terms and an overview of the theories used to analyse, interpret, and abstract the
gathered data.
2.1. Explanation and Use of Terms
Based on the three main topics and streams, the terms minimalism, sustainability and fair/sustainable
fashion are explained in the following part. Furthermore, minimalism is delimited to lean management.
This is necessary to form a common understanding of the used terms and main concepts.
2.1.1. Choice of Minimalism over Lean Management
Lean management - or lean in general - is an approach that one stumbles upon very quickly when doing
research in the field of reduction and simplicity on an organisational level. Lean management is used to
reduce the inner complexity of a company and is applied out of a (felt) necessity to optimise. The goal
is to gain a competitive advantage through more effective and efficient ways of working, optimising
workflows and reducing the consumers’ costs by cutting costs within the production process. These
practices reach from the design of products to the organisational culture and are applied continuously.
(Bertagnolli, 2020; Bicheno & Holweg, 2016)
Applying lean management and production methods to an organisation has positive benefits for its
sustainability and the environment since the company will strive to operate with higher resource
efficiency. Therefore, lean contributes to sustainability in different ways: efficiency, consistency,
sufficiency, resilience, and management (Bertagnolli, 2020). In that sense, our understanding of
minimalism on the organisational level and lean are partially overlapping. Nevertheless, we decided not
to use the term lean management to name our approach. However, lean management as an efficiency-
enhancing theory is invoked as an enabler of minimalism in the theoretical framework. Lean
management is a controversial term that some scholars debate about abandoning altogether
(Schonberger, 2019). We do not want to feed into that debate. Practitioners of lean management
acknowledge that it provides a large number of “fuzzy” frameworks (Bicheno & Holweg, 2016, p. 4),
numerous different tools and claim that “innovation and adaptation will always be required” (Bicheno
& Holweg, 2016, p. 4). Furthermore, lean management does not sufficiently consider the values of
sustainability and awareness essential to our research, as its original focus is lying on the economy
(Bertagnolli, 2020). Even though minimalism mostly lacks the application and research in the
organisational environment, it represents the holistic and aware approach that the aim and purpose of
this thesis demand more sufficiently. As we focus on sustainability practices, ethical and environmental
values and motivations behind certain practices are crucial for our research.
With that being said, we see that methods of lean and minimalism transferred to an organisation might
lead to the same practices and outcomes (simplification, reduction of processes and sustainable impacts,
resource efficiency), but from a different starting point and with different motivations. Therefore, the
overall aim is to apply minimalism on the organisational level, where lean management and production
practices are part of.
2.1.2. Minimalism: Definitions and Distinction
After arguing why we decided not to use the term lean to describe our approach, we reflect on the term
minimalism and the related concept of voluntary simplicity. A new definition of minimalism that can be
applied to the organisational environment is formulated.
Minimalism and Voluntary Simplicity
Researchers are not in agreement about the exact distinction between minimalism and voluntary
simplicity. Both concepts share similar values and approaches. VS is the older, more spiritual, idealistic
philosophy to a reduced consuming approach, while minimalism is seen as a more modern, reviving
form of VS. Elgin (1977), one of the main contributors to VS, states that:
8“The essence of voluntary simplicity is living in a way what is outwardly simple and inwardly
rich. This way of life embraces frugality of consumption, a strong sense of environmental
urgency, a desire to return to living and working environments which are of a more human scale,
and an intention to realize our higher human potential—both psychological and spiritual—in
community with others.” (p. 2)
Sustainability and environmental aims are seen as main topics and motivations in VS. Minimalism
touches upon practices and consequences of consumption in a broader range than VS does. In that sense,
the two lifestyles are interconnected, but minimalism is more than a variant of VS (Kang et al., 2021).
Nevertheless, the term voluntary simplicity is not as commonly used today. Furthermore, it is unclear
and vague and, therefore, more used as a background concept and philosophy (Kang et al., 2021).
Minimalism acts as a more specific approach and lifestyle that is focused on consumption. Because of
the above-described reasons, we use minimalism instead of VS.
Minimalism as an Individual Lifestyle
The term minimalism is mainly used in an individual context. Therefore, there are a variety of definitions
existent. What all reviewed articles on minimalism have in common is that minimalism is defined by
the voluntary act of choosing to reduce material consumption in opposition to forced minimisation or
simplicity out of external reasons, e.g. poverty. Secondly, research stresses the value-driven parts of that
lifestyle and consumption approach (Dopierała, 2017; Elgin, 1977; Kang et al., 2021;
Kraisornsuthasinee & Swierczek, 2018; Massoudi & Vaidya, 2018). The connection to sustainability
aspects is drawn by some scholars, some mention it more explicitly than others (Kang et al., 2021 see
chapter 1.2.3.). For this thesis, we adopt the definition provided by Kang et al. (2021) for minimalism
as an individual approach to living and adjust it to make it suitable for the business organisation level
afterwards. It represents our understanding the most and takes sustainability into account. They define
minimalism as:
“a sustainable living approach in which people proactively choose minimalism of their own
accord rather than being forced to do so by financial constraints, even if one of minimalism's
benefits could be greater financial freedom. Striving for minimalism is also different from
simply learning about how to better organize one's possessions. Minimalism involves
eliminating the excess in one's life to focus on what matters most.” (Kang et al., 2021, p. 803)
Minimalism on an Organisational Level
We aim to examine minimalistic sustainability practices and strategies on an organisational level.
Therefore, the existing definition of minimalism needs to be adapted. Applied to organisations and for
the use in our research, we adopt the definition of Kang et al. (2021) and transfer it to the organisational
context:
“[Minimalism is] a sustainable business strategy approach in which organisations proactively
choose minimalism of their own accord rather than being forced to do so by financial
constraints, even if one of minimalism's benefits could be greater financial freedom. Striving
for minimalism is also different from simply learning about how to better organize one's
processes. Minimalism involves eliminating the excess in one's business operations to focus
on what matters most - along the whole supply chain and within daily operations.” (adapted
from Kang et al., 2021, p. 803, changes in bold)
Minimalism involves a critical approach to consumption, resource efficiency, the cultivation of non-
materialistic sources of satisfaction and the removal of distractions. The aim is to create sustainable
value and awareness for every stakeholder and gain more freedom and flexibility. In contrast to lean
management, minimalism embodies a more holistic approach by adding a layer of awareness about the
environment to the simplicity and reduction concept. In the context of our studies, which are rooted in
the nested model of the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) (Giddings et al., 2002), the connection to the
environment and a holistic approach are crucial, as stated above. For organisations, taking the
9environment into account also means considering every human and non-human stakeholder in the
strategy and decision-making processes. In a nutshell, minimalism is the combination and adaptation of
lean management, SCM, and organisational methods with sustainability values at the core, awareness
and a critical approach to consumption.
2.1.3. Sustainability
The definition of sustainability and sustainable development is adopted from the Brundtland Report:
“Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (Brundtland, 1987, p.
15).
The proposed research is centred on the nested model of the Three Pillar Approach (Giddings et al.,
2002), focusing on environmental sustainability. Compared to the three-ring sector view of
sustainability, which equals environmental, social, and economic sustainability, the nested model
highlights the dependence of economy and society on the environment and that both are a subset of the
environment (Giddings et al., 2002).
Figure 2: Nested Model of Sustainability (as seen in Giddings et al., 2002)
2.1.4. Fair/Sustainable Fashion
For sustainable and fair fashion, no standard definition exists as the different definitions and concepts
of sustainability, TBL and fashion come together (Brismar, 2014). Fashion is made by people for people,
having the practical use of warming while also expressing culture and personality and is part of our
everyday life (Gardetti & Torres, 2013). Brismar (2014), author of ‘Green Strategy’ (sustainability
consultancy), developed the following definition of ‘more sustainable fashion’ that includes the three
dimensions of the TBL and will be used in this paper.
“More sustainable fashion can be defined as clothing, shoes and accessories that are
manufactured, marketed and used in the most sustainable manner possible, taking into account
both environmental and socio-economic aspects. In practice, this implies continuous work to
improve all stages of the product’s life cycle, from design, raw material production,
10manufacturing, transport, storage, marketing and final sale, to use, reuse, repair, remake and
recycling of the product and its components. From an environmental perspective, the aim should
be to minimize any undesirable environmental effect of the product’s life cycle by: (a) ensuring
efficient and careful use of natural resources (water, energy, land, soil, animals, plants,
biodiversity, ecosystems, etc); (b) selecting renewable energy sources (wind, solar, etc) at every
stage, and (c) maximizing repair, remake, reuse, and recycling of the product and its
components. From a socio-economic perspective, all stakeholders should work to improve
present working conditions for workers on the field, in the factories, transportation chain, and
stores, by aligning with good ethics, best practice and international codes of conduct. In
addition, fashion companies should contribute to encourage more sustainable consumption
patterns, caring and washing practices, and overall attitudes to fashion.” (Brismar, 2014)
The terms fair fashion and sustainable fashion will be used congruently, indicating the above-stated
definition of ‘more sustainable fashion’.
2.2. Presentation of Relevant Theories
After explaining the most important terms and concepts used in the research, relevant theories to the
body of research are presented. Additionally, their connection to each other, minimalism and
sustainability is explained. We present a theoretical framework that is later used to analyse gathered
primary data. The theories are organised based on the later presented framework and how they build
upon each other. For example, degrowth is a general concept covering all operational areas, while design
is very specifically applicable to the fashion industry.
2.2.1. Degrowth
The term degrowth was first coined in France (fr. Décroissance) in the mid- and late 1970s, mentioned
by French writers (Whitehead, 2013). In 2008, the ‘Economic De-Growth for Ecological Sustainability
and Social Equity Conference’ was held in Paris and resulted in a call “for a paradigm shift from the
general and unlimited pursuit of economic growth to a concept of ‘right-sizing’ the global and national
economies” (Declaration of the Parties, 2008 in Research & Degrowth, 2010, p. 1). Therefore, degrowth
does not imply a forced continuous shrinking of the economy but aims for a stable economy with a
constant throughput once the right size of the economy is reached by degrowth (Hankammer et al.,
2021). The existence of several definitions of degrowth is one of the main criticisms about the concept
(Khmara & Kronenberg, 2018). One of the definitions was given by the Research and Degrowth
Association in 2012, which explains sustainable degrowth as “a downscaling of production and
consumption that increases human well-being and enhances ecological conditions and equity on the
planet” (Research and Degrowth, 2012). Following this definition, degrowth is based on two principles
“1) that nomic activity must not exceed the carrying capacity of the biosphere; 2) that economic activity
should focus on enhancing human well-being and happiness and not on the avaricious pursuit of wealth”
(Whitehead, 2013, p. 142). So far, the concept of degrowth is applied chiefly on a state and policy base,
seldom on a business level (Khmara & Kronenberg, 2018). Khmara and Kronenberg (2018) explain that
degrowth-related actions and methods must be applied voluntarily and democratically but out of
necessity in order to sustain. Applying the concept to the business level, companies do not have to
downsize continuously but stick to the ‘right’ size and prioritise environmental and social purposes over
profit (Khmara & Kronenberg, 2018). Additionally, businesses that are already oriented towards
degrowth need to grow, not shrink (Khmara & Kronenberg, 2018). According to Nesterova (2020), a
degrowth business has to be oriented towards the three pillars of downscaling production and
consumption, orientation towards well-being, and a radical shift in values. Hankammer et al. (2021)
developed eleven literature-based principles and summarised them in a framework for organisations to
move towards degrowth. Those principles are the following (Hankammer et al., 2021):
1. Repurposing the business for the society and the environment
2. Promote societal acceptance for degrowth thinking
3. Reduce environmental impact along the supply chain
4. Product and service design for sustainability
115. Encourage sufficiency
6. Demonstrate leadership commitment and implement democratic governance
7. Enable usage and sharing of products (instead of owning)
8. Improve the work-life balance of employees
9. Be locally embedded and community-based
10. Enable autonomy and capacity development
11. Be open to sharing resources
The stated pillars and principles imply the reorientation away from capitalism towards environmental
and social objectives, revealing the connection of degrowth and sustainability. This includes the
necessity of degrowth businesses to meet human and non-human stakeholders’ needs by moving away
from pure profit maximisation and focusing on the environment and society (Nesterova, 2020). This
reorientation could, for example, lead to a reduction of the ecological footprint and an emphasis on
community, health, creativity, and diversity (Khmara & Kronenberg, 2020).
2.2.2. Organisational Structure: Complexity, Formalisation and Centralisation
The organisational structure influences how an organisation operates, and it is shaped by a company’s
mission and vision. It, therefore, is also seen to influence minimalism aspirations. Tolbert and Hall
(2009) give an overview of different aspects of organisational structure and its implications to
companies. Key dimensions to those structures are complexity, formalisation, and centralisation. All
three of them are often covarying and affect the company’s outcomes on an individual and an
organisational level. They come with various advantages and disadvantages. (Tolbert & Hall, 2009)
Complexity describes the spatial and horizontal expansion of an organisation. Spatial complexity allows
an adaption to the local environment the sub-offices operate in. It often co-occurs with horizontal
complexity, which mostly comes with growing as a company, since more level within the business calls
for more supervisory, and “some supervisory personnel are needed to oversee other supervisors”
(Tolbert & Hall, 2009, p. 32). Both types can be problematic, as with a growing level of complexity,
organisations tend to struggle with coordination and control of the different sub-units. Horizontal
complexity and tall hierarchies tend to interfere with innovation and openness to change (Wang &
Ahmed, 2003). According to Tolbert and Hall (2009), the decision to grow and become more complex
due to economic interests might “be counterbalanced by the added burdens and costs of keeping the
organization together” (p. 32). Therefore, growing as an organisation needs to be well-managed in order
to grow efficiently.
Formalisation in a company deals with the level of written rules and standardisation in operations. Since
written documents provide the same information to everyone, it can make the training process more
equal and efficient since new members can look information up instead of asking for guidance. On the
other hand, high levels of formalisation usually come with lower flexibility and variability in outcomes
to scenarios that were not foreseen by the rule-makers. (Tolbert & Hall, 2009) High levels of
bureaucracy and formalisation can hinder creative thinking and innovation (Lozano, 2014; Tolbert &
Hall, 2009).
Centralisation describes the number of people involved in strategy-making and decision-making
processes. With fewer people involved, these processes are faster and can lead to more efficiency
(Tolbert & Hall, 2009). However, new business approaches propose models of shared power and
involvement of a higher number of organisational members to gain competitive advantages, primarily
through more knowledge transfer and learning (Wang & Ahmed, 2003).
Facing the urgency of sustainability (Amran et al., 2014), conventional companies deciding to include
sustainability into their strategy tend to install CSR or sustainability departments to tackle affairs related
to sustainable development while sticking to a marked-based approach. Companies that already have
12You can also read
