For more than 20 years the starting point for any discussion of sustainable corporate activity has been the Brundtland Report. Its concern with the effect which action taken in the present has upon the options available in the future has directly led to simplistic assumptions that sustainable development is both desirable and possible, and that corporations can demonstrate sustainability merely by continuing to exist into the future. There have been various descendents of Brundtland, including the concept of the triple bottom line. This in turn has led to an assumption that addressing the three aspects of economic, social and environmental is the epitome of corporate social responsibility (CSR). It is our argument throughout this book that this notion is not just incorrect but also positively misleading through an obfuscation of the key issues surrounding such responsibility (see Aras and Crowther 2008a). In this book, therefore, we have re-examined the legacy of Brundtland and redefined what is meant by sustainable activity. In order to do this we have rejected the accepted term of sustainability, preferring instead the term durability to emphasise this change in focus. From this we have argued for a rejection of the triple bottom line and a redefinition of both CSR and sustainability.