Social Sustainability Indicators from Employees’ Perspective: A Qualitative Study on Whether Social Sustainability in Businesses Is Perceived as a Necessity, Preference, or Dream

Abstract

Contrary to the economic and environmental perspectives of sustainability, its social dimension seems to be overshadowed by the lack of research. The objective of this study is to identify social sustainability indicators in businesses from the perspective of employees. The study sheds light on the meaning and practices of social sustainability, and aims to understand how employees perceive and define social sustainability in the context of businesses. In this direction, data were collected from eight high-level employees working in different units in different sectors, with thematic analysis from qualitative research designs and in-depth interviews. The MAXQDA 2020 Program was used in the analysis of the data. As a result, in accordance with the designed model, three basic categories as “socially beneficial applications”, “anthropocentrism in job design”, and “value-creating relationships system” and twenty-six subcategories were defined. Based on the perspective of employees, it has been revealed that there is still a lack of complete awareness regarding social sustainability practices in businesses. However, it is believed that these practices are essential for protecting the future, creating a secure and unified environment, and promoting accountability and transparency towards stakeholders. Furthermore, efforts to enhance employee competence are considered important in the context of social sustainability practices in businesses. This study fills an important gap in the literature in terms of determining social criteria in terms of interpreting the performances of businesses and measuring their success.

1. Introduction

In the last ten years, “sustainability” has been on almost everyone’s lips. It is clear that everyone wants to raise awareness about both what it means and its types. Today (2 February 2023), even on Google, searching for the word “sustainability” yields “1,20,000,000” results. For Turkey, it is among the topics that almost everyone listens to curiosity. In fact, TV commercials, serials, and published books are mostly about these issues. For this study, which deals with social sustainability in terms of scope, understanding, and perception, when a “social sustainability” search is conducted on the same search engine, “4,920,000” results are encountered. However, studies on social sustainability in businesses are very few. Similarly, among the topics written researched in the national language of Turkey, interpretations of social sustainability practices and results in businesses are almost non-existent in the literature.

The world was first introduced to the concept of sustainability in 1987 by the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) [1]. In the Brundtland Report published by the Commission, sustainability is defined as “meeting the needs of the present without compromising the needs of future generations to meet their own needs”. Afterwards, the concept was shaped by the decisions taken by the countries to solve the problems of the planet and the published reports, and started to be mentioned with a holistic approach covering ecological, economic, and social dimensions. What is meant at the core of the concept is the ability to provide a self-renewing natural environment, social conditions based on equality and welfare, and an economic system without leaving anyone behind. The main aim here is to leave a livable world to future generations in every respect [2]. With another definition, it is “preserving the ability to exist continuously, together with the continuation of productivity and diversity” [3].

Although many definitions of the concept of sustainability are made today, the common emphasis in all definitions is on protection of the future. For this reason, in process until the concept of sustainability was defined in the international arena in 1987, it was thought that the most important component for development in the world was the economic one. Modernization was seen as creating urban areas incompatible with the natural environment, and the natural environment was seen only as a resting place to escape from the daily stress of modern life. However, the point reached has shown that uncontrolled economic development and consumption threaten all sectors and human life. For this reason, the idea that economic development is more important than environmental protection has begun to be rejected with international initiatives and published declarations. Understanding the importance of the environment, human health, and quality of life for economic activities, attention was drawn to the importance of environmental and social development for sustainable development, and emergency action plans were prioritized. As it is seen, it is no longer possible to talk about a development where environmental, social and economic development are independent of each other [4,5].

Contrary to the economic and environmental perspectives of sustainability, the social dimension has been included in fewer studies and is less conceptualized. Although it is thought that studies on social sustainability theory and practices have intensified in the last 10–15 years [6], its importance for businesses and its impact on the corporate world is relatively less in terms of research [7]. Because of some research, the necessity of focusing on social sustainability in studies conducted in the field of corporate sustainability was reminded in terms of emphasizing the social benefit dimension of businesses [8].

The fact that more and more social sustainability practices are being included in the interpretation of the performances and measurement of the success of the enterprises, leads to a foresight that the social developments in the enterprises encourage other sustainability dimensions. It is desirable for such an important initiative to take place in more applications, and in this study, it is aimed to reveal the richness of the content of the concept and to share important findings on the earnings of socially sustainable businesses. In line with the aforementioned goal, this study consists of two parts. In the first part, it is aimed to bringing a conceptual understanding of social sustainability practices in businesses, and then, in the second part, it is aimed to understanding the importance of social sustainability from the perspective of employees, by measuring the perception of social sustainability and emotional states with senior employees from different sectors. As a result, it has been discussed in the direction of the findings whether social sustainability practices in businesses are a necessity, a choice, or an imaginary situation.

2. Review of Previous Research on Social Sustainability and Its Practices in Businesses

Because the word “social” is broad and versatile with both analytical and normative meanings [9], it is difficult to conceptualize social sustainability, just like the concept of sustainability. Social sustainability emerges because of the fair distribution of production resources in societies, the completion of the socialization process for each individual, and the provision of social integration [4]. Although the content of the concept is multidimensional, it can be said that it contains qualitative elements. It is stated that it is not absolute and fixed, but rather dynamic due to its variable structure sensitive to time and space [10]. Ultimately, when social sustainability is mentioned, various concepts are understood, including society and social policy, urban development, organizational performance, product design, and life cycle [11].

Organizations play a major role in sustainable development in general, because they use the majority of society’s resources and have a large and deep impact on society. It is valuable to measure the contribution of organizations to sustainability and the damage they cause to the environment and to evaluate their performance in this context. But it is also difficult to measure. Thanks to the determination of the right criteria and the right performance evaluation is also important in terms of measuring its contribution to sustainability. Research has suggested the use of various methods, such as Environmental Impact Matrix, Managerial Attitude Surveys, Scoring of the Organization’s Environmental Performance Reports, especially in evaluating the environmental performance of organizations. Thanks to these analyzes, it will be possible to accurately evaluate the environmental performance of organizations belonging to the state and private sector [12]. In addition, employee empowerment and commitment are also social channels that help the correct interpretation of organizational performance. An empowered and engaged employee will be more devoted at work, more productive, and more willing to achieve organizational goals. Moreover, encouraging them to participate in decisions will bring them closer to their performance goals and will be beneficial for unity in overcoming organizational challenges [13].

The sustainability of businesses is explained by two approaches, the first of which is the Social Responsibility Pyramid Approach of Businesses developed by Carroll in 1991 and the Stakeholder Approach put forward by Milton Friedman in the 1970s [14]. Social sustainability is also the most important factor that helps businesses’ economic development through corporate social responsibility, along with economic and environmental contexts [15]. It is inevitable that organizations should attach importance to social responsibility activities in order to see the big picture of sustainability [16]. In this context, it will be one of the decisions to be taken for businesses to integrate the basis of social justice and development with corporate social responsibility activities with the effect of sustainability. In addition, in order for businesses to be sustainable, they need to make new and radical arrangements on organizational structure, goals and objectives, shared values, product design, production systems, organizational behavior, business, and management functions [3].

Many vital concepts and practices are included in the scope of social sustainability. Among these issues, there are results that have a surprisingly superior impact on society, such as equal use of health [17] and education [18] opportunities, human empowerment [19], human-centeredness in job design [20], participatory management [21], work life balance [22], wage-quality of life relations [23], equality and fairness [24], and respect for ethical elements [25]. Economic efficiency and social efficiency in businesses can only reach a superior level with environmental and social sustainability, which are the other two pillars of sustainability [8].

Similarly, the following elements are included in the understanding of social sustainability:

-

Production/service respectful to nature and people, efforts to create value in an accountable manner to all stakeholders, making sustainability a business policy, acting with a sense of responsibility towards future generations [2,15],

-

A livable standard of living in line with principles that attach importance to human and social values, such as equality of opportunity, employment, participation in political processes, and justice [17,26],

-

Improving the working conditions of the employees, making them work more humanely and improving their living conditions, as well as carrying out their activities by considering the quality of life of the society and the next generation [22,27],

-

Provision of adequate social services, such as distributed equality, gender equality, credibility, political accountability and participation, to what extent social values, social identities, social relations, and social institutions can continue into the future [24,28,29],

-

Equality in access to important services between generations, a system of relations that values different cultures in conveying social sustainability awareness, a sense of community [30],

-

Coexistence of culturally and socially diverse groups, improving the quality of life in all segments of society, social integration [21,31],

-

Ensuring the efficient use of natural resources by present and future generations while meeting human needs fairly [4,25],

-

Thanks to the importance that businesses give to the implementation of social responsibility projects, individuals’ equal access to resources, in other words, ensuring social equality [16,32].

When the sustainability dimensions mentioned above are examined, each social structure is at the center of organizational life, in other words, it forms the essence of organizations. Bringing social sustainability to the forefront of a business will increase the welfare dimension of its employees in the work and life relationship, and will increase its productivity, effectiveness, innovation, and ultimately competitive advantage thanks to its employees. On the contrary, the lack of interest in the social relations system of enterprises in the way of being socially sustainable also prevents their employees from realizing their potential or developing it themselves [29].

Putting sustainability truly at the heart of the business is not an end in itself, but a difficult journey. Looking at the issue from a multidimensional perspective, we can say that an enterprise will achieve sustainability by polluting the nature less in the production process, by working for energy and water efficiency, by offering healthy products and services to consumers, by improving the working conditions of its employees, and by organizing trainings for its employees in this direction. In this sense, it is also important for businesses to adopt global goals and carry out their activities in this direction for their own future. It is a well-known fact that businesses that include sustainability policies in their business processes and organizational structures reduce their costs, increase their performance and profitability in the end. Therefore, this state of environmental, corporate, and social management will increase the reputation and brand value of the enterprise [2].

Basically, every job starts with education. Every business that embarks on the adventure of sustainability first provides trainings on this subject to all its stakeholders, from its employees to its board of directors. Afterwards, a competent “green team” should be formed to carry out these studies. This team with green competencies should regularly research the relationship between energy, material consumption, and contribution to nature, and prepare forecasting and informative reports on operational efficiency and the future position of the enterprise, as well as comparisons with the past [33]. These articles, which contain the aforementioned information, should be shared in a clear and unambiguous language within the company and by external stakeholders who are sensitive to the products and services offered by the business.

Today, as a requirement of the sustainable reporting approach of businesses, it is not only considered sufficient to report their financial information, but also it has become a necessity to publish social and environmental sustainability reports that measure their environmental and social success in which their sensitivity towards the society and the environment in which they operate [34]. The most widely accepted and the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) [35] prepares preferred sustainable reporting framework worldwide. In the social context, (1) labor practices and decent work, (2) human rights, (3) society, (4) product/service responsibility take place in it [36]. Issues, such as employment, workforce, management relations, investments, anti-discrimination efforts, local communities, anti-corruption, consumer health, and safety are covered in detail in the social sustainability report.

According to Ajmal et al. (2017) [6], examining the social dimension of sustainability separately from the point of view of businesses and society is evidence in interpreting the social performance of relevant businesses. From a society perspective, evidence of social sustainability is fundamentally central to the triangle of social development, social justice, and social development. From a business perspective, social sustainability takes place in a spiral based on learning and development, safety and security, and social development. The friendly social interaction process with stakeholders requires special sensitivity to trust and security issues. In addition, according to the authors, the economic and environmental dimensions of sustainability, which have other links, are guided by the basic criteria of social sustainability (for example, equality and equity, welfare, health, education, culture and climate, employee motivation) [5].

In their research, Görmezoglu et al. (2022) concluded that explicit and implicit knowledge sharing in organizations would contribute to the provision of social sustainability in businesses through self-education of employees and managers [37]. For this reason, it is recommended that businesses aiming at social sustainability should attach importance to knowledge sharing in their organizations and practices that allow their employees to train themselves.

When the studies on the meaning and practices of social sustainability in businesses are examined, it is understood that there are many studies on the conceptual dimension, and examples of applications are included with the premises, such as accountability, social responsibility, creating and offering fair and equal opportunities, increasing the working life quality in the context of improving working conditions. However, in the relevant studies, no inference was made that the meaning and importance of these practices were addressed from the perspective of the employees. The fact that it includes employees’ perceptions of social sustainable business practices makes this study different and makes it valuable in the context of filling this gap in the literature.

3. Materials and Methods

In this part of the study, the findings of interviews with employees in different positions from different sectors between January and February 2023 are included. The findings were analyzed through the MAXQDA 2020 program.

3.1. Purpose and Importance of the Study

The aim of the study is to explore the effects of perceived social sustainability in terms of employees in businesses. When the literature is examined, it has been observed that there are very few studies investigating the perception of social sustainability from the perspective of the employees. In the 2017 study of Ajmal et al., social sustainability indicators were presented from the perspective of society and businesses. Inspired by the theoretical structure and the related study, it was aimed to reveal the indicators from the perspective of the employees. In the light of the data obtained through thematic analysis and in-depth interview technique, understanding the emotions, thoughts, attitudes, and perceptions of the participants directly and discussing the findings are the most striking aspects that distinguish this study from its counterparts.

3.2. Research Method and Data Collection

With the qualitative process and exploratory point of view explained systematically below, it is desired to create a social reality with subjective data, such as employees’ perceptions of social sustainability, feelings, experiences, and thoughts. Just like the desire to reach the big picture with the pieces of a puzzle [38], it is important to analyze social relations correctly and to guide real life correctly. It is aimed to present the perceptions and experiences of the sample correctly with a holistic approach, together with the information obtained from the natural environment in which the cases take place and the participant role of the researcher (Figure 1) [39].

Due to the nature of qualitative research, the above planning process involves flexibility and interaction. In other words, each stage of the process may follow each other, and newly acquired knowledge may require revision of previous stages. In the study, firstly, “What is social sustainability in enterprises from the perspective of employees, how is it and how should it be?” research questions were determined and researches on the subject were examined in depth in this direction. Both social sustainability theory and literature and individual and professional experiences have an impact on the emergence of the research questions. In the selection process of the sample, the participation of senior employees from different sectors was needed. The purpose of sector diversity is to observe whether social sustainability practices change on a sectoral basis; the purpose of senior employees is that they are expected to be more aware of the sustainability policies and practices in the business. The study included eight employees from eight largest enterprises located in Konya, Turkey, during the period of January to February 2023 as the sample population. The interviewees were senior executives from different sectors. Each interview lasted approximately 10–15 min and conducted in the presence of the participants. It has been effective to decide on the selection of the sample, within the means available, together with the people who are suitable for the research problem, have knowledge about the subject, are willing to participate in the interview, and are willing to devote time to the research. Actually, theoretical saturation comes to the fore in determining the sample size in qualitative research [40].

During the study, it can be said that the research has a participatory role, in other words, it interacts with the sample in the process of obtaining information from the sample. At this stage, there was only an orientation to present examples in order to make the questions asked more understandable. In addition to the observations and document reviews of the researcher as a person in the educational organization, in-depth interview technique and strategy, one of the qualitative data collection tools, was used, and it was predicted that the results obtained through more than one tool would be more realistic and accurate. With the semi-structured interview technique, open-ended questions were directed to the participants in the same order and face-to-face. These questions are as follows:

• How would you define the concept of “sustainability”? (How would you interpret it from an economic, social and environmental perspective?)
• Are principles such as equal access to social services, intergenerational equality, and a sense of community considered important in your current business? (Explain the application of these principles, which are included in “social sustainability”, in your business by giving examples)
• Do you think “social sustainability” is a choice, a necessity, or a dream to come true? (Please explain your reasons with justification)
• What are the elements that will add wealth to your nation that you can put under the “green” label? (For example, interpret your nation’s potential energy sources, national green investments and results, reasons that make businesses “green”)
• As someone working in a business that serves social sustainability and ultimate social good, are you “valued”? (For example, interpret the management perspective on issues, such as performance evaluation system, remuneration management, participation in decisions)
• Is success rewarded in your organization? (For example, are there financial celebrations, such as additional bonuses, wages, or moral celebrations, such as praise, “employee of the month/year” when the targeted situation is achieved?)
• Does your business prepare a “social sustainability report”? Do publicly shared results make you happy or work under pressure? Do you think sustainability disclosures should be voluntary or mandatory? (Please explain the reasons)
• Have you taken risks for the sake of Social Sustainability? What mistakes have you made for Social Sustainability? (Please explain your reasons with examples)

Thematic analysis was used in the processing of the data collected with the relevant data collection methods. It is aimed to reach the concepts and relations that will explain the collected data. In this direction, the data were brought together and organized with certain main themes and sub-themes (open-axial-selective coding, respectively). In the last step of the research planning, the results were limited and analytical generalizations were reached. The data obtained through the MAXQDA Qualitative Data Analysis Program was visualized and analyzed by creating a model. The reason for choosing the MAXQDA Program is that it provides convenience in collecting, organizing, analyzing, visualizing, and publishing a large number of data with qualitative methods, and it also has guides and explanations in the language of the researcher’s country. The program is widespread, its user interface has been translated into more than 10 languages, in addition to being used in more than 150 countries.

3.3. Data Analysis

In this study, the three-stage process of Miles & Huberman (1984) was used for data analysis [41]. In the first stage, the data obtained because of examining the observations, documents, and interview forms were reduced. Unprocessed raw data were extracted in accordance with the research question and summarized in accordance with the classified data set. In the second stage, the data were concretized, in other words, visualized. The data obtained in the previous stage were transformed into a level to make inferences about the research, and the patterns between the data sets were revealed. In the last stage, the research was concluded and its accuracy was checked. During the research, the hidden reality targeted was revealed. The aforementioned progressive data analysis approach is still used today [42].

4. Results

In the present study, opinions were taken from eight relevant sector senior employees and their emotions were tried to be described.

Table 1. Demographic Characteristics of the Participants.

Demographic Variables		Total	Percentage
Gender	Male	4	50.00%
	Female	4	50.00%
Age	31–40	7	87.50%
	41–50	1	12.50%
Educational Level	Bachelor	4	50.00%
	Master	4	50.00%
Work Life Experience	5–10 Years	3	37.50%
	11–15 Years	3	37.50%
	16–20 Years	2	25.00%
Sector	Recycling	1	12.50%
	Consultancy	1	12.50%
	Automotive	1	12.50%
	Finance	1	12.50%
	Real Estate	1	12.50%
	Public	1	12.50%
	Law	1	12.50%
	Production	1	12.50%
Job Position	Accountant	1	12.50%
	Sales and Marketing Manager	1	12.50%
	Production Manager	1	12.50%
	Tax Inspector	1	12.50%
	Real Estate Broker	1	12.50%
	Public Servant	1	12.50%
	Lawyer	1	12.50%
	Quality Control Specialist	1	12.50%
Total Participant		8	100.00%

below shows the demographic characteristics of the participants.

When Table 1 is examined in detail, it is observed that the participants are composed of equal numbers of men and women, and the majority of them have bachelor’s degree education and have been in working life for at least 5 years. In addition, the participants have worked in the same position in the same sector throughout their business life, they only had the opportunity to be promoted vertically (while they were assistants, they were promoted to manager in the same unit).

4.1. Reliability and Validity (Trustworthiness)

Due to the nature of qualitative research, it is not possible to determine a precise quality-enhancing criterion. The effort of the research to accurately and fairly reflect the different realities in the minds of the participants, in other words, to convince the reader about the legitimacy of the research, is at the center of the validity and reliability discussions. In this context, qualitative researchers should make determinations in accordance with the chosen research paradigm while using validity and reliability criteria [43].

From the point of view of the positivist paradigm, this research stands close the view that “epistemological diversity in qualitative studies is too wide to be represented by a single criterion” as stated by Sandelowski and Barroso (2002) [44], contrary to the view of Lincoln and Guba (1985) [45], to be based on predetermined criteria. Depending on the real-life experiences of the researcher, in this study, such as the participants having sufficient experience in interpreting the sector, strengthening the clarity of the questions asked with the role of the participant, informing the researcher about the subject before starting the interview, and having a preliminary stage of research, qualitative following up on quantitative research and examining the codes that have been created repeatedly also help increase the validity and reliability of the study.

4.2. Open-Axial-Selective Coding

All of the accessible studies on social sustainability were examined, and three main themes describing social sustainability indicators from the perspective of employees were reached. As can be seen in Figure 2, 26 sub-codes have been defined. The sub-codes of “sense of unity, social integration, safe and security, green team building, accountability/transparency” created under the main theme of “Value-Creating Relationships System” were the categories with the highest frequency. The most important sub-code was “equal access to education/health/social services”.

In addition, the visual consisting of the most frequently used words within the framework of the answers given by the participants is as in Figure 3.

The indicators of social sustainability from the perspective of employees can be explained with the model presented in Figure 4. At this stage, which is referred to as “selective coding” in qualitative research, basic categories and subcategories can be presented holistically.

5. Discussion

Essentially, the starting point of sustainability is with the environmental context and perspective. The aim here can be stated as the fulfillment of responsibilities towards nature by making the environment and nature sustainable. Although important developments have been made in the field of production technologies, the limited production factors, especially nature, necessitated the development of new understandings and regulations in this direction. In addition, it should not be overlooked that the resources provided by nature are indispensable resources of life. The fact that these resources are not renewable resources requires careful attention to their use. Thus, the aim of the concept of sustainability, which was developed for the environment, was put forward as reducing poverty in nature, providing the use of natural resources with a limited and egalitarian approach, developing and using environmentally friendly technologies, and ensuring population control [3]. Within the scope of this understanding, the “socially beneficial applications” category created in the study was integrated because of the participants’ similar views on the equal distribution of resources in creating social benefit. In addition, in the cross-table analysis, it was seen that female participants mostly emphasized “equal access to education/health/social services” under the category of socially beneficial applications, while male participants emphasized “human rights” more. As a matter of fact, in studies investigating women’s working and life quality on the axis of social sustainability in the literature, mostly inequalities were emphasized [46]. Results, such as exclusion and dissatisfaction between the sexes due to inequalities in employment and education, have been the subject of research [47,48]. The fact that women and men are not equal in the axis of home work social life is among the most important factors that drag both businesses and societies backwards and negatively affect world sustainability.

Sustainability in businesses has become a necessity for those who want to continue their success day by day, rather than trying to convince a handful of relevant people. Among the main reasons for this situation are the increase in intergenerational inequality in accessing various opportunities and resources in the field of health and in the social context in general, food insecurity, the increase in forced migration from underdeveloped countries to developed countries due to demographic imbalances, increase in regional inequalities in nations, and lower levels of employment opportunities and transportation. There are factors, such as disproportionate population distribution in access to building conditions [49]. It is not as easy as it seems for businesses to have sustainability. Although steps, such as converting in-house lamps to led bulbs or purchasing and using energy-efficient appliances are important, it is undeniable that all stakeholders need awareness, willingness, and coordination. On the other hand, businesses that understand the value of social sustainability in the way of being ready for the future with its social aspect estimate that it can affect millions of lives in obtaining a holistic result on issues, such as wages, health, safety, gender, and access to rights that affect the future of their work [50]. Issues, such as consumer and employee satisfaction and loyalty, labor relations and standards, human welfare, equal opportunity, fair income distribution, and protection of personal data, are also among the social sustainability criteria. However, compliance with the “ethics” within the organization under all circumstances is among the most important prerequisites for a business to be constantly attractive. Similarly, violation of ethical principles becomes a problem that the company will never forget/hardly forget for its employees, intermediaries, suppliers, and customers, who are important stakeholders of the business. Therefore, it seems reasonable and logical for businesses to explore various sustainability tools they can leverage. Employing sustainability professionals, using SA 8000 standards, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) are some of them. Although LCA seems to be the most expensive of them all, the tool provides the highest return. Recognizing and digitizing any effect that will cause resource waste in the entire life cycle of the manufactured product will enable the identification of areas to be improved within the enterprise, and thus offer an important approach in strengthening the sustainability performance. With the SA 8000 certificate of conformity, it will be understood how fair and proper the activities of the enterprise are on behalf of the employees. Although it does not issue certificates, ISO 26000 is another tool that guides businesses to become socially sustainable and comply with the UN Sustainable Development Goals. ISO 26000 offers important approaches in all dimensions of sustainability [51].

Compared to the past (traditional point of view) in socially sustainable businesses, changes in management understandings, such as vision, mission, principle, value, product, production system, structure, relations with the environment, and functional structure, are striking. For businesses, while the objectives were previously determined for performance, profitability, and shareholder welfare, the relationship between work-life quality and the welfare of stakeholders comes to the fore in the new management style. While business values emerge as rationality, knowledge, and self-sufficiency in the traditional management approach, they emerge as intuition, understanding, and communication in the new management approach. While the functionality, design of the products, and the elements of packaging that are harmful to the environment are at the forefront in the traditional management approach, environmentally friendly design and packaging come to the fore in the new management approach. In the traditional management approach, energy, resource intensive, and production systems that prioritize technical efficiency are used, while in the new management approach, production systems that prioritize low energy and resource use and environmental efficiency are preferred. While in the traditional management approach, hierarchy, central authority, and central decision system elements are given importance as organizational structure, non-hierarchical structure, participatory, widespread authority concepts and practices are included in the new management approach. While in the traditional management approach, it is possible to establish dominance over the environment in relations with the environment and to see air pollution and wastes as an external factor, in the new management approach. It is aimed to be in harmony with nature, to eliminate and manage air pollution and wastes. While marketing that aims to increase consumption in relation to business functions and finance that aims to maximize short-term profits are effective in the traditional management approach, consumer and customer-oriented marketing and long-term sustainable growth finance approaches are effective in the new management approach [52].

With their unique aspects, it is striking that socially sustainable businesses are future-oriented in their work-life quality, they want to create permanent social benefits, they try to take the necessary measures to minimize the negative effects of their activities, they care about all stakeholders, and they act with a social approach [53]. In fact, in this study, one of the main categories that came to the fore was “Anthropocentrism in Job Design”, and when the frequency distribution is examined, the premise and results of the quality of work-life especially come to the fore in determining the happiness of the employees. In addition, in the cross-table analysis, it was seen that female participants mostly emphasized “improving work/life conditions” under this category, while male participants emphasized “rewarding” more.

One of the important results noticed is that a society is healthy, both personal, work, and cultural rights are respected, and depends on leaders who ensure that all people live peacefully without discrimination [54]. The tools should be compatible with the goals, and it is possible to apply auxiliary tools on the path of sustainability with open communication between the business and its stakeholders [51]. Establishing a sincere relationship, maintaining the focus on communication, willingness, and mutual contribution of the parties are among the key aspects of sustainable relations [55]. The category of “value-creating relationships system” created in this context, refers to the bundle of relationships among the employees based on unity, integration, trust, and appreciation through leaders. In addition, in the cross-table analysis, it was seen that female participants emphasized “safe & security” the most under this category, while male participants emphasized “sense of unity” more.

On the contrary, conflict, violence, harassment, human humiliation, and impoverishment are indicators of the lack of social sustainability [55]. In this context, the high quality of life-happiness gap in low-development countries is understood for similar reasons. Ultimately, the winners of the sustainability war in businesses are those who rank high on the stage of history, especially in terms of trust, image, and reputation [56].

6. Conclusions

In terms of management and organization, social sustainability in businesses requires a series of relations and principles control in the sustainability eco system, with modern management approaches that focus on employee happiness and growth. Businesses that are fair, transparent, open to differences, focusing on human and humane life and keeping them alive, and pursuing permanence are defined as socially sustainable businesses. When businesses consider the social pillar of sustainability with the hope of leaving a prosperous life for future generations, the effect of the synergetic change will be great. The indicators that the employees, who are the most important stakeholders in the enterprises, want to feel and see on the axis of sustainability, are the important elements that will be considered as the basis for the comparison of a business between yesterday, today, and tomorrow.

In this study, with the thematic analysis and in-depth interview technique, the perception of social sustainability was defined from the perspective of employees in different units in different sectors, and the desired social sustainability criteria were determined with three main categories and twenty-six sub-categories in total. Along with the study, it was noticed that a business should match its moral values with its activities, prioritize the social welfare of its stakeholders especially its employees turn to practices that increase employee performance, and determine sustainable future-oriented principles and targets, finally, ensure that the economic, environmental, and social aspects of its activities are integrated and integrated with each other. Conducting it in a consistent way will help that business to find more place in the history scene than others will.

The present study contributed to the social sustainability indicators of Ajmal et al. in 2017 by adding a view from the point of view of business employees. Although the criteria are mostly determined at the individual level, it is foreseen that future studies will shed light on the group and organizational reflections. In addition, the inclusion of more different sector workers in the sample will help to make sectoral comments and comparisons.