The Importance of Implementing SDGs by Small and Medium Size Enterprises: Evidence from Germany and Poland

Abstract

This study addresses the problems attributed to the implementation process of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in relation to the SME sector in Germany and Poland. The initial part of this study discusses the theoretical aspects of sustainable development, with particular emphasis on the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, including 17 SDGs. The importance of the contribution made by small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) to the development of today’s economies, based on the example of OECD countries, was also highlighted. Regarding methodology, to answer the research questions, empirical data were obtained using a simplified online questionnaire based on a pre-established questionnaire. The target group consisted of experts on SMEs, not the SMEs themselves, in order to obtain an external view of the SME sector. As part of the general conclusions, it can be stated that the current contribution of SMEs to the implementation of the SDGs presents, on average, an upward tendency. Certainly, a greater involvement of entrepreneurs and a better understanding of the specificity of sustainable development processes would be advisable. In addition, it is noticeable that the national context is significant in the implementation of the SDGs. For example, German enterprises pay more attention to the environmental dimension of sustainable development, whereas Polish enterprises pay more attention to supply chain management. Overall, most of the respondents stated that the absence of financial resources remains the primary obstacle to the implementation of sustainable development goals in enterprises, while motivation results from cost reduction and increase in turnover.

1. Introduction

All United Nations member states adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development in 2015 [1]. The agenda is a plan of action that contains 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The purpose of the goals is to “realize the human rights of all and to achieve gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls. They are integrated and indivisible and balance the three dimensions of sustainable development: the economic, social and environmental” [1]. Recent data show that global humanity is not on track to meet all the goals by 2030 [2]. Indeed, some of the metrics exhibit negative long-term trends, with increasing levels of unsustainable activity [2]. Environmental and social issues such as global climate change, water scarcity, loss of biodiversity, and human rights continue to present ever-increasing challenges for humanity [3,4,5].

The Global Sustainable Development Report (GSDR) identifies four ‘levers’ (the means) to enable the necessary transformations to meet the SDGs. The levers are ‘Governance’, ‘Economy and finance’, ‘Individual and collective action’, and ‘Science and technology’ [2]. There is no doubt that business enterprises have the resources to make a significant contribution to the achievement of the SDGs. For example, if a group of scientists and engineers develop a new sustainable technology, then it would contribute to all four levers, especially if the technology became a global standard.

Currently over 80 percent of large corporations across all industry-sectors report on corporate responsibility [6]. Furthermore, the alignment of business values with social and sustainability values is the most important aspect investors look for when deciding where to invest [7]. Finally, a significant majority of large corporations connect their business activities with the SDGs in their corporate reporting [6]. However, the current SDG data do not reflect this significant contribution from businesses. Even where you might expect businesses to make a significant contribution, namely SDG 12 (sustainable production and consumption), we observe negative long-term trends [2].

This paradox raises a question about the effectiveness of the contribution from business enterprises to the SDGs. This question is not new. Paul Hawken [8] identified the limitations that the contribution of businesses may have in 1993. Schaltegger and Wagner [9] have made similar observations. In a more recent publication, Dyllick and Muff [10] refer to the ‘big disconnect’ to highlight the discrepancy between corporate responsibility initiatives at the micro-level and an increase in positive measures of progress towards a sustainable world at a macro level [10].

Firms employing over 250 people generate nearly half of global GDP; the remainder is attributable to small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) [11]. SMEs also account for over 95% of all enterprises in OECD countries [12], and approximately 70% of jobs and 50–60% of GDP in the OECD area [13]. Thus, potentially, SMEs play an extremely important role in the contribution of global business to achieving the SDGs. There are many publications highlighting the ‘sustainability’ contributions of large corporations [6,14,15]. In contrast, the nature of the contribution the skilled crafts sector (mainly micro and small enterprises) and SMEs are making to the SDGs is either underresearched, negligible, or remains unclear and underreported [16,17,18]. Where research has been undertaken, results show that SMEs appear to be moving slowly towards implementing business sustainability and are currently at a low level of business sustainability [19]. We aim to contribute to this research gap by initially undertaking some explorative research. The exploratory approach is important since there is currently no consolidated theoretical model to investigate the SDGs from a business and management perspective [17], and the contribution from business and management scholars remains fragmented [17].

Our study focuses on SMEs and their understanding of the SDGs, as well as the resources they employ (endogenous variables) to meet these goals. Our study also makes a comparison between SMEs in Germany and Poland. Since Germany and Poland have different economic, institutional, and cultural arrangements [20,21], it is instructive to see how these differences (in the exogenous variables) may relate to an SME’s ability to contribute to the SDGs.

Given the above arguments, the purpose of this paper is to identify the drivers and barriers to SMEs’ ability to contribute to the SDGs in Germany and Poland. Thus, the following research questions can be posed: What is the nature of SMEs’ contribution to the SDGs? Does the country context influence the degree to which SMEs contribute to the SDGs?

The paper is structured as follows: Firstly, we present a review of the relevant literature on sustainability and SMEs. Secondly, the methodology is presented. Thirdly, we analyze and discuss the results at the SME sector and country levels. Finally, we present the conclusions, limitations, and recommendations of the study.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Research Sample

The research is exploratory in nature in order to gain insights, which will support a more in-depth investigation at a later stage. Thus, the target group was individuals and organisations that interact with and/or support SMEs in some way, and not the SMEs themselves. We feel this approach gives an external and more objective view of the SME sector with respect to its response to the SDGs.

The selection of individuals and organisations from Germany and Poland formed a convenience sample selected from existing networks of the authors. We do not claim the sample is representative since we are asking individuals and organisations, and not the SMEs themselves. However, the affiliations of the respondents were diverse (N = 44), including shareholders (N = 1), chambers of commerce and trade associations (N = 16), consultants (N = 21), and educational institutions (N = 6).

The questionnaire was sent to 53 respondents from Germany and 62 respondents from Poland. A total of 44 respondents took part in the survey (overall response rate 38.3%). Twenty-four responses were from Germany (response rate 45.3%) and twenty responses from Poland (response rate 32.3%). Geographically, the sample included individuals and organisations from five German states (major cities in Saxony, Bavaria, Baden-Württemberg, North Rhine-Westphalia, Hesse) and four Polish provinces (Lower Silesia, Masovia, Kuyavia-Pomerania, Podlaskie).

2.2. Research Instrument—Design and Deployment

To answer the research questions, the empirical data were obtained using a simplified online version of an established questionnaire-based survey instrument [22]. The original instrument was designed in collaboration with the Impact Hub Dresden [22] and was optimized after pre-testing in the field [22]. The instrument includes all 17 SDGs, as well as relevant sustainability drivers, barriers, and areas where SMEs can contribute—see tables in Section 3. Apart from some limited attribute-based questions, closed opinion-based qualitative rating scales were used throughout the questionnaire.

For the German and Polish research, the questionnaire was translated from German into English and then back-translated for comprehension and clarity from English into German. The English version was translated into Polish. Slight adjustments were made to accommodate the different country contexts.

All potential respondents were emailed personally and given a link to fill-out the questionnaire. The German and Polish questionnaires were available online between December 2021 and January 2022.

2.3. Data Analysis

All statistical analysis was undertaken using SPSS^® software version 28.0.0.0 (190). Paired T-tests were used for comparisons between pairs of variables (e.g., pairs of sub-scales) from the same population. A one-way ANOVA was used to make a comparison between defined populations on the same variable (e.g., comparisons between Germany and Poland for a given scale item).

3. Results

3.1. Summary of the Survey Results on SDGs

We have asked the following questions and received the following results:

3.2. How Would You Rate the Level of Awareness of Corporate Sustainability in SMEs?

When asked about the level of awareness of corporate sustainability in SMEs, participants gave an average score of 2.59, with 1 for not aware and 5 for very aware in the rating scale. This means that the overall level of awareness for corporate sustainability is assessed as rather not conscious. The average value for Germany is 2.6, for Poland 2.4.

3.3. To What Extent Do You Think SMEs Are Involved in Measures to Achieve the SDGs?

With regard to the estimated participation of SMEs in the measures to achieve the SDGs, a total of 35 participants answered.

Ranking lists were drawn up from the responses to the answer options. Rank 1 corresponds to the most votes and the highest rank to the least. The rankings are based on the number of votes for an answer option. The number of votes for the answer options is for:

• The SDGs are fully integrated into the strategy: between 0 and 5
• The SDGs are limited to operational initiatives: between 6 and 20
• The SDGs are not included: between 6 and 17.

Overall, SDG 9 “Building resilient infrastructure, promoting inclusive and sustainable industrialization, and supporting innovation” is the most likely to be integrated into the strategy. Followed by SDG 15 “Protecting, restoring, and promoting the sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, managing forests sustainably, combating desertification, ending, and reversing land degradation and ending biodiversity loss”. The third rank is shared by the following six SDGs: 4. “Ensure inclusive, equitable and quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all”; 5. “Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls”; 8. “Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment, and decent work for all”; 13. “Take action to combat climate change and its impacts”; 14. “Conserve and use oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development”; and 16. “Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at all levels”.

In terms of which actions are limited to operational initiatives, in the overall ranking, 13. “Take action to address climate change and its impacts” is ranked first, 3. “Ensure healthy lives for all people of all ages and promote their well-being” and 12. “Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns” are ranked second. The next rank is shared by 5. “Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls” and 7. “Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable, and timely energy for all”.

SDGs not considered by SMEs, according to survey respondents, are ranked with the highest being 10. “Reducing inequalities between countries”, followed by 14. “Conserving and using oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development”, and 16. “Promoting peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, enabling access to justice for all, and building effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at all levels”, and ranked lower is 2. “Ending hunger, achieving food security and improved nutrition, and promoting sustainable agriculture”.

In comparison, between the opinions from Poland and Germany regarding the integration of the SDGs into the strategy, the first four SDGs are on the same level (

Table 1. Comparison of the results of Germany and Poland on the integration of the SDGs into the strategy.

Germany			Poland
9	Build resilient infrastructure, promote widespread and sustainable industrialization and support innovation	=	9	Build resilient infrastructure, promote widespread and sustainable industrialization and support innovation
15	Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, manage forests sustainably, combat desertification, end and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss.	=	15	Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, manage forests sustainably, combat desertification, end and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss.
4	Ensure inclusive, equitable and quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all	=	4	Ensure inclusive, equitable and quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all
5	Achieving gender equality and empowering all women and girls	=	5	Achieving gender equality and empowering all women and girls
8	Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all		16	Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels
16	Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels		13	Take action to combat climate change and its impacts
14	Conserve and use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development		11	Making cities and settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
3	Ensure a healthy life for all people of all ages and promote their well-being		8	Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all
6	Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all		14	Conserve and use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development
10	Reduce inequality within and between countries		3	Ensure a healthy life for all people of all ages and promote their well-being
17	Strengthen means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development		6	Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
13	Take action to combat climate change and its impacts		10	Reduce inequality within and between countries
11	Making cities and settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable		17	Strengthen means of implementation and revitalise the global partnership for sustainable development
1	End poverty in all its forms and everywhere	=	1	End poverty in all its forms and everywhere
2	End hunger, achieve food security and better nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture	=	2	End hunger, achieve food security and better nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture
7	Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all	=	7	Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all
12	Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns	=	12	Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns

Source: Authors’ compilation based on the conducted survey.

). The biggest differences relate to measures to combat climate change (13.) and the shaping of cities and settlements towards more inclusion, security, resilience, and sustainability (11.). Both SDGs are six steps higher in the Polish ranking.

The differences between Germany and Poland are mixed when it comes to which SDGs are limited to operational measures, as shown in

Table 2. Comparison of the results of Germany and Poland, which SDGs are limited to operational initiatives.

Germany			Poland
13	Take action to combat climate change and its impacts		12	Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
5	Achieving gender equality and empowering all women and girls		7	Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all
8	Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all		13	Take action to combat climate change and its impacts
12	Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns		11	Making cities and settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
7	Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all		17	Strengthen means of implementation and revitalise the global partnership for sustainable development
6	Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all		3	Ensure a healthy life for all people of all ages and promote their well-being
15	Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, manage forests sustainably, combat desertification, end and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss.		5	Achieving gender equality and empowering all women and girls
11	Making cities and settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable		8	Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all
17	Strengthen means of implementation and revitalise the global partnership for sustainable development		6	Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
9	Build resilient infrastructure, promote widespread and sustainable industrialisation and support innovation		1	End poverty in all its forms and everywhere
1	End poverty in all its forms and everywhere		4	Ensure inclusive, equitable and quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all
2	End hunger, achieve food security and better nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture		9	Build resilient infrastructure, promote widespread and sustainable industrialisation and support innovation
14	Conserve and use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development		2	End hunger, achieve food security and better nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture
16	Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels	=	16	Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels
10	Reduce inequality within and between countries		15	Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, manage forests sustainably, combat desertification, end and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss.
3	Ensure a healthy life for all people of all ages and promote their well-being		10	Reduce inequality within and between countries
4	Ensure inclusive, equitable and quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all		14	Conserve and use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development

Source: Authors’ compilation based on the conducted survey.

. The two biggest differences are in the two following SDGs: 3. “Ensure a healthy life for all people at all ages and promote their well-being”, and 15. “Protect, restore and promote the sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, manage forests sustainably, combat desertification, halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss”.

A comparison (

Table 3. Differences in the results of Germany and Poland, which SGDs are not taken into account.

Germany			Poland
10	Reduce inequality within and between countries	=	10	Reduce inequality within and between countries
16	Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels		2	End hunger, achieve food security and better nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture
2	End hunger, achieve food security and better nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture		14	Conserve and use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development
14	Conserve and use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development		5	Achieving gender equality and empowering all women and girls
1	End poverty in all its forms and everywhere		16	Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels
11	Making cities and settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable		15	Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, manage forests sustainably, combat desertification, end and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss.
12	Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns		1	End poverty in all its forms and everywhere
7	Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all		8	Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all
9	Build resilient infrastructure, promote widespread and sustainable industrialisation and support innovation		6	Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
15	Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, manage forests sustainably, combat desertification, end and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss.		3	Ensure a healthy life for all people of all ages and promote their well-being
17	Strengthen means of implementation and revitalise the global partnership for sustainable development		4	Ensure inclusive, equitable and quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all
6	Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all		11	Making cities and settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
3	Ensure a healthy life for all people of all ages and promote their well-being		12	Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
13	Take action to combat climate change and its impacts		7	Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all
8	Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all		9	Build resilient infrastructure, promote widespread and sustainable industrialisation and support innovation
4	Ensure inclusive, equitable and quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all		17	Strengthen means of implementation and revitalise the global partnership for sustainable development
5	Achieving gender equality and empowering all women and girls		13	Take action to combat climate change and its impacts

Source: Authors’ compilation based on the conducted survey.

) shows that the opinions from the German and Polish perspectives are similar in the upper range and that a change in ranking is more likely to emerge in the lower range. There is agreement on which SDGs are not taken into account by SMEs in item 10. “Reduce inequality within and between countries”. On the other hand, the biggest difference is in the area of gender equality (5.), which is ranked 13 places higher in Poland than in Germany. This shows that the topic of gender equality is given much less consideration in Poland than in Germany.

3.4. Why Do You Think It Might Be Difficult for SMEs to Contribute to the SDGs?

When asked why it might be difficult for SMEs to contribute to the SDGs, a total of 32 respondents answered. Again, the answers of the participants were ranked (

Table 4. Ranking of reasons for difficulties in SMEs’ contribution to SDGs.

Reason for Difficulty	Proportion in %	Rank
Lack of financial resources	59.4	1
Lack of time/resources	50.0	2
Lack of awareness	50.0	2
Too bureaucratic/time-consuming	40.6	4
Lack of expertise/qualified staff	40.6	4
Lack of suitable ESG investors (environmental, social and corporate governance)	28.1	6
Lack of suitable cooperation partners	28.1	6
Uncertainty in stakeholder management	28.1	6
Too complicated/complex	25.0	9
Aversion to change/inflexible	25.0	9
Too expensive (rising costs, prices too high)	25.0	9
Fear of a competitive disadvantage	21.9	12
Lack of relevant experience	21.9	12
Lack of awareness in civil society	21.9	12
Lack of leadership qualities	18.8	15
Lack of media coverage	12.5	16
Legal risks/IPR risks	9.4	17
Risks for research and development	6.3	18
Lack of credibility of SMEs on sustainability issues	6.3	18
Lack of know-how/understanding in the banking sector	3.1	20

Source: Authors’ compilation based on the conducted survey.

). When looking at the answers as a whole, the biggest difficulties are lack of financial resources with 59.4% of the votes, followed by lack of time and lack of awareness of SDGs, each with 50% of the votes. Next, high levels of bureaucracy and time required to implement actions, as well as lack of expertise and qualified staff, are cited as reasons for difficulties (40.6% each). The lack of suitable ESG investors, suitable cooperation partners, and uncertainties in stakeholder management share a place in the middle of the list with 28.1%. Similarly, the reasons of high complexity, reluctance to change, and high costs are ranked in the midfield with 25%. A total of 21.9% of the participants also see difficulties as being based on fear of a competitive disadvantage, lack of relevant experience, and lack of awareness in civil society. Furthermore, lack of leadership (18.8%), lack of media coverage (12.5%), and legal/IPR risks (9.4%) are estimated as reasons. Bringing up the rear in the ranking, and thus the lowest rated, were risks to research and development (6.2%), lack of credibility of SMEs in sustainability issues (6.2%), and lack of know-how/understanding in the banking sector.

3.5. How Do You Think the Situation for SMEs Can Be Improved So That They Can Contribute to the SDGs?

As examples for improving the situation of SMEs, measures for financial support (8 mentions), such as subsidies, grants, tax relief, and incentives by politics/government were mentioned above all. In addition, the participants state that there should be improved communication in the sense of raising awareness of the topic, educational work on benefits, and the implementation of measures. Furthermore, there is a lack of measures and implementation concepts tailored to SMEs. The reduction of bureaucratic hurdles was also mentioned. Furthermore, the introduction of standards and the reduction of complexity were mentioned.

3.6. In Which Areas Do You Think SMEs Contribute to the SDGs?

A total of 29 participants expressed their opinion on this question.

Table 5. Ranking of areas where SMEs contribute to SDGs.

Area	Proportion in %	Rank PL	Rank D	Rank Total
Recycling and reuse of products and materials	53.1	1	1	1
Environmental management (ISO 14000)	46.9	8	2	2
Research and development	40.6	1	4	3
Products and services	40.6	8	3	3
Employee well-being/work-life balance	40.6	1	8	3
Supply chain management	37.5	1	4	6
Purchasing and supply	34.4	8	4	7
Quality management (ISO 9000)	34.4	8	8	7
Providing jobs	34.4	5	10	7
Design and technology	28.1	5	12	10
Codes of conduct	25.0	13	4	11
Business ethics/ethical business practices	25.0	13	10	11
Service and product support	21.9	13	12	13
HRM practices	21.9	8	18	13
Logistics	18.8	5	17	15
Operations and processes	15.6	13	12	16
Social responsibility (ISO 26000)	15.6	13	12	16
Marketing	12.5	13	16	18
Management leadership	6.3	13	18	19

Source: Authors’ compilation based on the conducted survey.

shows an overview of the absolute numbers as well as the descending ranking of the areas. Most (53.3%) of the participants stated that SMEs contribute in the area of recycling and reuse of products and materials. Environmental management (ISO 14000) comes second with 46.9% of the votes. Research and development, products and services, and employee wellbeing/work–life balance are in joint third place with 40.6%. Supply chain management is ranked one vote lower at 37.5%. In seventh place with 34.4% are purchasing and supply, quality management (ISO 9000), and workplace provision. A total of 28.1% of respondents believe that design and technology contribute to the SDGs. This is followed by codes of conduct and business ethics/ethical business practices with 25% of the votes each. In the bottom third of the ranking are service and product support (21.9%); HRM practices (21.9%); logistics (18.8%); operations and processes, and social responsibility (ISO 26000) (15.6% each); and marketing (12.5%). The least number of participants indicated SME involvement in SDGs in the area of management-leadership (6.3%).

3.7. What Factors Motivate SMEs to Commit to the SDGs?

In response to the question about motivating factors to commit to the SDGs, the participants could choose on a scale between 1—strongly disagree and 5—strongly agree. Not all factors were rated by all participants, so

Table 6. Ranking of motivating factors for SMEs to commit to SDGs.

Factor	Adjusted Weighted Average
Cost reduction	4.38
Increase in turnover	4.23
Customer acquisition	4.08
Image enhancement	4.04
Customer requirements	3.74
Innovation potential	3.42
Increase attractiveness for investors	3.40
Responding to political demands	3.26
Increase employee satisfaction	3.23
Social and societal responsibility	2.89
Ethical reasons	2.81
Ecological responsibility	2.73

Source: Authors’ compilation based on the conducted survey.

shows a mean value of the answers that takes this into account.

According to the participants’ assessment, the factors “cost reduction”, “increase in turnover”, “customer acquisition”, and “image enhancement” are more motivating. The factors “customer requirements”, “innovation potential”, “increasing attractiveness for investors”, “reaction to political demands”, and “increasing employee satisfaction” are also rated as having a somewhat lower motivating effect. According to the participants, the factors “social and societal responsibility”, “ethical reasons”, and “ecological responsibility” are rather not motivating for the use and implementation of the SDGs.

3.8. To What Extent Do Ethical Aspects Play a Role in Value Creation, e.g., Production, Supply Chains, for Companies?

The opinion of the participants was asked on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 stands for no role and 5 for a great role. For the participants as a whole, ethical aspects play a rather minor role in value creation, with a weighted average value of 2.8. The weighted average value for Polish participants is 2.22, and for German participants 3.13.

3.9. To What Extent Do Aspects Such as Employee Health, Bullying, and Discrimination Play a Role for Companies?

The participants’ opinions were asked on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being very important and 5 being not important at all. For the participants as a whole, aspects such as employee health, bullying and discrimination tend to play a greater role for companies, with a weighted average value of 2.43. The weighted average value of 2.43 is not significant for companies. The weighted average value for Polish participants is 2.78, and for German participants 2.13.

4. Discussion and Conclusions

When answering the research questions, it can be stated that the current contribution of the SMEs sector to the implementation of sustainable development goals presents an average level with an upward tendency. A finding which reflects the conclusions from other research [18]. Certainly, a greater involvement of entrepreneurs and a better understanding of the specificity of sustainable development processes would be advisable. In addition, it is noticeable that the national context is significant in the implementation of the SDGs. German enterprises place greater emphasis on the environmental dimension of sustainable development. This may be due to different levels of government support for green innovation [23] and/or sector differences [24].

At this point, it is worth noticing that the increasing importance of environmental issues and generally understood sustainable development contributes to the formation of new trends at the operational level of enterprises’ functioning. This is confirmed by the findings resulting from studies covering different countries and cultural determinants [25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34].

Sustainable development is perceived as the source of new entrepreneurial opportunities which facilitate solving both social and environmental problems. It is beneficial from the perspective of enterprises because they can contribute to the implementation of “green solutions” and, at the same time, respond to the needs of customers who increasingly frequently pay attention to the benefits of these solutions. This is important because the vast majority of respondents were of the opinion that it is the absence of financial resources which predominantly constitutes the barrier in the implementation of sustainable development goals in enterprises. Other obstacles included the lack of environmental awareness, education, and advisory solutions dedicated specifically to the SMEs sector. These findings are reflected in other research [35].

The activities aimed at sustainable development are still identified mainly with large international corporations, which notice market and image related benefits in this concept [33]. It is difficult to define precisely to what extent SMEs undertake sustainable development, for ideological reasons, for the benefit of employees, clients, or for society. In turn, taking into account the difficulties in implementing the issues related to sustainable development, the relatively low awareness of the SME sector is noticeable compared to the one presented by the leaders of international companies. This applies to Polish SMEs to a greater extent.

In times of such intense competition, all market distinguishing features and sources of competitive advantage are investigated. In this light, the enterprises taking into account environmental and social aspects of SDGs are considered innovative and more modern. The common feature of such enterprises is their focus not only on achieving profitability by meeting specific needs, but also exerting a positive impact on society and the environment. This may be reflected, e.g., in the savings of raw materials, packaging, and electricity cf. [36].

On the other hand, the study participants pointed to “classical” elements motivating companies to implement the SDG, i.e., cost reduction, increase in turnover, customer acquisition, and image enhancement cf. [36]. This finding is consistent with those of other researchers [35,37]. In order to raise awareness of sustainability in SMEs more broadly, research initiatives are also being taken in Germany, such as the provision of explanatory and maturity models as well as concrete recommendations for action [38].

The SME sector plays an important role worldwide in building economic growth and innovation in all industry sectors. It is no different in the case of German and Polish markets. The sustainable development of this sector is of great importance for the socio-economic development of each country, because the group of small and medium-sized enterprises creates the majority of jobs on the market, and shows creativity and commitment, which also results in the development of new advanced technologies.

As part of the general recommendations, it can be noted that the SME sector must be widely involved in both countries in implementing sustainable goals. There are still opportunities to be developed in this respect. More findings on sustainable development goals implementation may also be found in other similar research papers [39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54].