Every year, Davos becomes a stage for big ideas, glossy commitments, and speeches that promise a cleaner, fairer, more resilient economy. Sustainability is framed as strategy, a boardroom level priority that can unlock competitiveness, investment and long term value.

Yet behind the language of transition sits a quieter reality: the hardest sustainability work rarely happens in summit rooms. It happens inside organisations, where decisions are contested by those whose definition of “doing good” extends beyond profit to include people and planet, where new approaches and innovations are put forward by innovative, idealistic individuals, and progress depends on whether their teams are willing to push through resistance in the pursuit of something better.

This is why the most impactful sustainability story right now might not be what leaders say in Davos, but what young professionals are being trained to do when sustainability stops being a vision and becomes an action.

Skills required to make a difference in sustainability

For students, that shift often begins with a sudden realisation that sustainability is not a department or a policy label, but a way of thinking and acting that changes everything a company does.

Jayant Chaurasia, a student at Nova School of Business and Economics in Portugal, describes the mindset change he experienced following some deeper learning during his Masters in Management studies. “Students need to build a few key skills to make a difference. First is systems thinking – the ability to see how things are connected.”

He adds a warning that feels like a direct response to the confident simplicity of narratives weaved at conferences that, whilst well intentioned can be harder to adhere to once back in the office. “A decision made in one part of a business can unexpectedly affect people, the planet, and profits,” he continues.

This is where conflict begins. Committing to sustainability forces trade-offs to the surface, and these trade-offs force organisations to choose. What makes pursuing sustainability difficult is that the choice being made is rarely between what’s “good” and what’s “bad”, but between competing goods, and between short-term comfort and long-term resilience.

In practice, the most difficult part of sustainability work is not understanding what should happen, but persuading others that it must happen, especially when the costs are immediate and the benefits are not only slow to see, but are widely distributed.

Jayant makes that human side explicit. “Secondly, we need strong communication and empathy. You can’t build sustainable solutions without listening to people and getting them involved.” His point cuts through the idea that sustainability is primarily technical, because most resistance is not technical either. It is social, cultural, and political.

His experience working on a real company project sharpened that lesson. “I worked mostly on the communication side how to get employees and clients to really care about sustainability,” he reveals. Even the best plans can collapse when the people who must carry it do not believe in it.

Sustainability is a lot more complicated than ‘just strategy’

Davos often treats sustainability as a competitive advantage, and in the abstract that is true.  

Yet on the ground, sustainability frequently looks like disagreement. People argue about costs, timelines, metrics, and priorities. The right idea can still fail if it threatens revenue, disrupts supply chains, or exposes uncomfortable truths about how value is created. The question is whether business education is producing graduates who can handle that. 

Himanshu Todwal, an MBA student at INSEAD, frames the sustainability skillset as something closer to mastering effective leadership under constraint. “To make a meaningful impact on sustainability, students need a unique blend of systems thinking, stakeholder empathy, and data fluency,” he says.

This systems thinking helps a graduate recognise unintended, wider consequences of an initiative. Empathy helps them engage people who may be sceptical, or simply exhausted by competing priorities. Data fluency becomes the credibility that wins internal debates and drives action, especially when the default response is to delay.

This is where the Davos framing starts to feel incomplete. Sustainability is not just strategy. It is the human skills that allow for negotiation, persuasion and also the dedication to see a plan through to completion. Himanshu argues that it is the ability to have influence without authority, especially for young professionals who enter organisations at the bottom of the hierarchy, that is vital for progression.

“Young professionals can challenge the status quo, question legacy systems, and push for purpose-driven innovation,” he reveals. He strips away the idea that sustainability belongs only to executives. “Sustainability isn’t just a boardroom agenda; it thrives through the everyday choices employees make.”

The point is uncomfortable, because it implies that a company can attend climate panels, announce targets, and still fail if daily decisions remain unchanged. It also implies that the most important sustainability battles are not the decisions made at the top but how they are navigated, enacted and repeated internally.

Creating a learning environment that mirrors reality

This reality is shaping how programmes position sustainability. Catherine da Silveira, Programme Director of the CEMS Master’s in International Management at Nova SBE, highlights why young people are not entering the workforce as neutral observers. “Unlike older generations, young people were born at a time where major risks for the planet and its inhabitants were already identified,” she says. That changes expectations, and career choices. 

That is why her conclusion is a provocation disguised as advice. “Young people can help businesses and the society become more sustainable by opting to start their careers in ‘less obvious’ organisations where their possible impact is not visible at first sight but potentially bigger.” It suggests that sustainability leadership may require choosing environments where resistance is stronger and progress is slower, but the pay-off for staying the course could be significant.

Business schools are adjusting accordingly, pushing sustainability into settings where students cannot avoid friction. What matters here is not the number of sustainability electives on offer, but whether the learning environment resembles the reality graduates will enter, where sustainability is debated, delayed, diluted, and sometimes quietly dropped.  

Professor Florian Stahl at Mannheim Business School describes an approach built around proximity to practice, where the people teaching are close to the pressures shaping decisions. “Many of our lecturers are experts, executives, or even founders with extensive practical experience and expertise in these areas,” he reveals. That kind of exposure changes what students see as possible, because it anchors sustainability in organisations, not slogans, and in action instead of theory. .

This practical grounding also changes the atmosphere in which students learn. Stahl notes that “a series of company visits and guest lectures, often from alumni who work in the field of sustainability or have successfully founded their own companies, complement the courses on offer.” Through such opportunities, students are forced to confront how change actually happens, through incentives, constraints, and the slow negotiation of trade-offs that never make it into headline commitments.

At Corvinus University of Budapest, Katalin Ásványi, Dean for Sustainability, points to a similar realism, highlighting that the challenge can often come from working with stakeholders who do not share the same priorities. Equipping students with the capabilities to navigate such resistance can be a powerful tool to enter the job market with – as well as one that can make a real-world difference.

“The course has already demonstrated tangible real-world impact through students’ application of what they learned,” she shares. Then comes the scale of engagement. “Students developed more than 14 CSR strategies in collaboration with 11 community partners at the BA level and 3 at the MA level.”

When students are placed in that kind of ecosystem, the work stops being theoretical almost immediately. You cannot stay vague when communities, organisations, and partners need something implementable, and when compromise is the path to progress. 

What turns this from experience into credibility is that the work leaves the classroom. Ásványi adds, “Several of these projects were directly implemented, contributing to sustainable practices such as social inclusion, poverty reduction, and responsible consumption.” This practical experience reveals what conflict really looks like in this space. It is not always loud disagreement. Often it is the challenge of aligning interests, securing resources, and designing something that others will still be using long after the project ends. 

A harsh approach to sustainability

INSEAD’s model brings a different kind of intensity. Professor Mark Stabile points to the way strategy teaching can be turned into an impact exercise, learning swiftly without without reducing its rigour. “A strong example of students applying classroom learning to real-world challenges is INSEAD’s Master Strategist Day (MSD), complemented by initiatives such as the Business as a Force for Good Practicum and summer internships with social impact organisations.”

He describes the exercise as “a flagship experiential component of the MBA core Strategy course,” where students are not asked to debate what should be done, but to decide what can be done, quickly, and then defend it. 

During the MSD, students conducted market analyses, engaged directly with senior leadership, and, within an intense 18-hour window, proposed actionable short- and long-term strategies. 

It is difficult to romanticise sustainability under those conditions. You are forced into prioritisation, trade offs, and the uncomfortable recognition that good intentions do not become outcomes unless someone makes a choice and accepts the consequences. 

At Vlerick Business School, Professor Esha Mendiratta anchors that same idea. “At Vlerick, our programmes are designed with a bias for action, while remaining grounded in solid evidence.” The programmes bridge sustainability theory and practical skills through a combination of case studies, simulations, and real-world projects. Students are not being trained to recognise sustainability as important. They are being trained to make it operational, even when it collides with performance metrics and limited time. 

It prepares students for the moment sustainability stops being a shared aspiration and becomes something that has to be defended inside budgets, timelines, and competing priorities. 

Vlerick’s hands-on, experiential projects are the backbone of its learning model, explains Professor Esha Mendiratta. The work is designed to be uncomfortable in a productive way, because it is built around real constraints and real accountability. “The In-Company Project (like an internship) places students with real companies for about two months, partnering directly with leaders of these companies to solve live sustainability challenges,” she adds.  

Training graduates for the future of sustainability

For Davos level promises to survive contact with reality, someone has to be capable of navigating that kind of environment, where sustainability is not a slogan but an actual work task to solve with imperfect information and limited time. 

This is where the question returns, unanswered, and perhaps deliberately so. If Davos frames sustainability as strategy, the emerging reality is that young professionals are being trained for the moment strategy meets resistance.  

They are being trained to negotiate, to quantify, to persuade, and to keep going when the easy answer would be to postpone. The harder question is whether companies will treat those graduates as inconvenient idealists, or as the people they need to make their sustainability stories true. 

Interested in this topic? You might also like this…