
Responsible Leadership for Sustainable Transformation:
From Good Intentions to Systemic Impact
Description
This short course examines why leadership that is well-intentioned, ethical, and socially motivated often fails to deliver meaningful sustainability outcomes. Drawing on contemporary research on responsible leadership and grounded empirical evidence from the tourism and agritourism sector in Vietnam, the course moves beyond normative appeals and best-practice prescriptions to explore how leadership operates as a socially embedded, multi-level process.
Participants are invited to rethink leadership not as an individual attribute or moral stance, but as a relational and contextual practice shaped by stakeholders, institutions, culture, and power dynamics. Through a series of thematic units, the course develops an evidence-informed understanding of how responsible leadership emerges, how it works through identifiable mechanisms, and why it sometimes reproduces the very problems it seeks to address. The course is designed for leaders, policymakers, educators, and practitioners engaged in sustainability-oriented change who seek to strengthen their capacity for judgment, reflexivity, and systemic thinking rather than acquire prescriptive tools.
​
Overall Course Learning Outcomes
By the end of the course, participants will be able to critically distinguish responsible leadership from adjacent moral leadership approaches and explain why ethical intent alone is insufficient for sustainable transformation. They will be able to analyze sustainability challenges through a multi-level lens that integrates individual action, organizational dynamics, and broader social and institutional contexts. Participants will develop the capacity to identify and interpret key mechanisms through which responsible leadership influences sustainability outcomes, including stakeholder relationships and social capital dynamics. They will also be able to recognize common failure points in sustainability-oriented leadership initiatives and reflect on the role of positionality, context, and power in shaping leadership outcomes. Finally, participants will be equipped to apply responsible leadership principles in a context-sensitive manner that acknowledges uncertainty, tension, and unintended consequences.

Unit 1. Foundation
Unit 1: Why Good Leadership Fails in Sustainability Contexts
​
Description
This foundational unit addresses a paradox at the heart of contemporary leadership for sustainability: despite widespread awareness of environmental and social challenges, and despite the presence of leaders who are genuinely committed to “doing the right thing,” many sustainability initiatives fail, stall, or generate only symbolic change. Rather than attributing these outcomes to individual shortcomings or lack of commitment, this unit examines failure as a structural and relational phenomenon.
Drawing on responsible leadership research and reflexive qualitative evidence, the unit explores how good intentions can be constrained, redirected, or neutralized by organizational routines, stakeholder expectations, cultural norms, and institutional pressures. Participants are encouraged to move beyond simplistic success–failure narratives and to view leadership breakdowns as analytically informative moments that reveal how sustainability efforts are shaped in practice. The unit establishes a critical foundation for the course by reframing failure not as an exception, but as a central site for learning about responsible leadership.
​
Learning Outcomes
By the end of this unit, participants will be able to:
-
Explain why good intentions do not reliably lead to sustainability outcomes
-
Identify common structural and contextual barriers to sustainability-oriented leadership
-
Distinguish individual leadership intent from system-level effects
-
Interpret leadership failure as a source of insight rather than individual deficit
-
Recognize how norms, power, and stakeholder pressures constrain leadership action
-
Reflect critically on their own assumptions about effective leadership

Common Mistakes
Timing
One of the most frequent mistakes is timing. If you go over three minutes, you are automatically disqualified. But being too short is also a lost opportunity. Every second you do not use is time someone else will take to promote their work more effectively. You do not need to aim for an exact three minutes—very few people can manage that perfectly—but you should target between 2.50 and 3 minutes. That way, you stay within the rules while also making full use of the time available.
​
The Blank moment
​
A second issue is over-reliance on memorization. Many participants learn their text by heart, which is natural. But if the script is too complex, written in a style that is not really your own, or packed with academic language, stress can easily cause a blank moment on stage. Almost every competition has at least one participant who loses their text completely. If that happens, do not panic: you can ask for a redo, just for the sake of sharing your project, even if you are disqualified. The best way to avoid this risk is to write your talk in the way you naturally speak. Imagine explaining your research aloud to a friend, then write down those sentences. What you end up learning is not an artificial script but your own words, which are much easier to recall under pressure.
​
Content balance
​
A third common problem is content balance. Too often, students spend most of their time describing the background of the project. While passion for the subject is important, the audience needs to hear more than context. They want to know what you will actually do and why it matters to them. Imagine there are investors in the audience. If they were to fund your project, what return on investment would they get? This framing helps you shift from explaining what excites you personally to explaining what your research can contribute to others.
​
A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words...
​
A fourth common mistake concerns the relationship between the image and the spoken content. Experience shows that only a very small amount of text is necessary on a 3MT slide. The audience cannot both read a content-packed slide and listen to a fast-paced speech; if they are busy reading, they will stop listening to you. This is why the image becomes so important. It should be memorable, striking, or even amusing—something that triggers emotion, whether surprise, concern, joy, or relief. Some presenters use a simple process illustration (with icons rather than words), a cartoon-style representation of their topic, or a single evocative picture of a person or place. If you decide to use AI-generated images, be mindful of the risk of “AI fatigue.” Distinguish yourself with a strong, consistent style so that your visual supports the message rather than distracting from it.
​
Some examples (various styles)

Past Winners
Newcastle Business School Winner - 2025
Alex Gibson - Sport Management​

The Art of Presenting
We are not all equal when it comes to public speaking. Some people feel shy or anxious in front of an audience, while others thrive on sharing their ideas and draw energy from the crowd. For many, presenting in English adds another layer of difficulty. Certain words can feel hard to pronounce, and the effort of expressing yourself in a second language can be draining.
​
Like most skills, there is no miracle solution—only practice. The ability to speak clearly and confidently improves with time, preparation, and feedback. If you feel that you underperform when presenting, consider investing in this skill. A few hours of focused coaching can make a remarkable difference in how you communicate, how you are perceived, and how much you enjoy the experience.
​
At Newcastle Business School, several HDR students have worked with a professional coach for their confirmation seminar, 3MT, or final defense. The sessions are not free, but the results often justify the investment. If you can afford it, working with a coach may be one of the best ways to strengthen your presence and confidence as a researcher.
​
We are pleased to recommend Thomas Riviello, founder of Riviello Academic Advisory (RAA), who has worked extensively with our HDR cohort. A former headhunter based in the United States, Thomas brings over fifteen years of experience in academic and professional communication. He has supported numerous doctoral candidates in navigating difficult confirmation scenarios, including cases requiring a redo, candidates experiencing high anxiety, and individuals whose strong accents posed initial challenges to audience engagement.
​
Meet Riviello Academic Advisory (RAA)
Name: Thomas Riviello
Business Name: Riviello Academic Advisory (RAA)
Contact Information:
-
Email: contacttraa@gmail.com
-
Phone: +1-512-954-3883
-
WhatsApp: +1-512-954-3883
​
Get started today:
-
Schedule a Free Consultation to discuss your needs and see how I can support your success.
-
Download My Free Guide to mastering the PhD confirmation process and job interviews.



