Cognitive Frames in Corporate Sustainability: Managerial Sensemaking with Paradoxical and Business Case Frames (original) (raw)
Related papers
A Cognitive Perspective on the Business Case for Corporate Sustainability
2007
This paper proposes that a cognitive perspective on corporate sustainability and competitiveness might allow new insights into the question of the business case. The paper explores how respondents from 12 firms make sense of their firm's investments in corporate sustainability activities by analyzing the mental models evoked. The interviews showed that a business case perspective emerged as the dominant logic. A subsequent analysis of the content of the knowledge schemas that were elicited surfaced four dimensions of ...
Corporate sustainability management encompasses multiple dimensions: environmental, social, and economic. Companies are increasingly evaluated within the public sphere, and within their own organizations, according to the degree to which they are perceived to simultaneously promote this nexus of virtues. This article seeks to explore the tensions frequently faced by organizations that strive to manage these dimensions and the role of public policy in that pursuit. A multiple–case study approach is utilized in which the authors selected case organizations according to whether they were attempting to manage the three dimensions of sustainability. The authors utilize paradox theory and a typology provided by previous research to understand the nature of the tensions that emerge in the selected case study organizations. They extend this previous work by examining the role of public policy in providing the situational conditions to make these paradoxical tensions salient, and they examine organizational responses to these conditions. Directions for firms, policy makers, and future researchers are provided on the basis of this study's findings.
The facets of the sustainability paradox
Meditari Accountancy Research
Purpose This paper aims to examine why the sustainability paradox exists and how it unfolds by focusing on intraorganizational dynamics. It explores how organizational actors perceive and make sense of sustainability and thereby contribute to the sustainability paradox. Design/methodology/approach In a case study on IREN, an Italian listed multi-utility with considerable engagements with sustainability, data collection through interviews, e-mails and document analysis revealed contradictions raised by directors and middle managers. Findings were analyzed by iterating with the literature used to frame this study, which combines organizational sensemaking, paradoxes and management control. Findings The sustainability paradox comprises various facets. Directors and middle managers interpret sustainability differently depending on their role within the organization and their perceptions of the concept itself. Different interpretations thus occur within and across organizational levels a...
Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 2014
This paper demonstrates the potential of a qualitative empirical research method [Ganzheitliche Bewältigung von Komplexität (GABEK W )] for systemic sustainability research. We interpret systemic corporate sustainability as a research programme that views the company and its environment as an ongoing process of social construction. Furthermore, we argue that the mental models of relevant actors are crucial within the process of social construction. We then present GABEK W as a unique method for qualitative empirical content analysis and highlight that GABEK W can contribute substantially to systemic sustainability research because it holds the potential to unearth and analyze the mental models of diverse actors with the scrutiny of empirical research. We illustrate this potential with a case study of a major German company's sustainability management (BASF AG), and we outline avenues for future research for an empirically oriented approach to systemic sustainability research.
A Paradox Perspective on Corporate Sustainability: Descriptive, Instrumental, and Normative Aspects
Journal of Business Ethics, 2017
The last decade has witnessed the emergence of a paradox perspective on corporate sustainability. By explicitly acknowledging tensions between different desirable, yet interdependent and conflicting sustainability objectives, a paradox perspective enables decision makers to achieve competing sustainability objectives simultaneously and creates leeway for superior business contributions to sustainable development. In stark contrast to the business case logic, a paradox perspective does not establish emphasize business considerations over concerns for environmental protection and social well-being at the societal level. In order to contribute to the consolidation of this emergent field of research, we offer a definition of the paradox perspective on corporate sustainability and a framework to delineate its descriptive, instrumental, and normative aspects. This framework clarifies the paradox perspective's contents and its implications for research and practice. We use the framework to map the contributions to this thematic symposium on paradoxes in sustainability and to propose questions for future research.
Exploring the Cognitive Foundations of Managerial (Climate) Change Decisions
Journal of Business Ethics
Climate change is a complex, multilevel challenge with implications of failure unimaginable for current and future generations. However, despite the Paris Agreement supporting the imperative for action in an atmosphere of scientific consensus, organisations are failing to take the decisive action required. We argue that this lack of organisational action needs to be addressed by examining the cognitive foundations of managerial decisions on climate change and sustainability. A systematic review of research on cognition, sensemaking and managerial interpretation where it is linked to climate change or sustainability is presented within this article. The results detail a multilevel analysis highlighting key themes and the core concepts from the literature including factors shaping the cognitive process, to elucidate reasons for inaction and potential for promoting change. Through this research, an integrated model is presented demonstrating the interaction of factors, cognitive processes and outcomes. Based on this analysis, potential reasons for inaction are proposed and countered by three potential solutions linked to leadership, social norms and structural reform.
Tensions in Corporate Sustainability: Towards an Integrative Framework
Journal of Business Ethics, 2014
This paper proposes a systematic framework for the analysis of tensions in corporate sustainability. The framework is based on the emerging integrative view on corporate sustainability,which stresses the need for a simultaneous integration of economic, environmental and socialdimensions without, a priori, emphasising one over any other.The integrative view presupposes that firms need to accept tensions in corporate sustainability and pursue different sustainability aspects simultaneously even if they seem to contradict each other. The framework proposed in this paper goes beyond the traditionaltriad of economic, environmental and socialdimensions and argues that tensions in corporate sustainability occur between different levels, in change processes andwithin a temporal and spatial context. The framework provides vital groundwork for managing tensions in corporate sustainability based on paradox strategies. The paper then applies the framework to identify and characterise four selected tensions and illustrates how key approaches from the literature on strategic contradictions, tensions and paradoxes -i.e. acceptance and resolution strategies -can be used to manage these tensions. Thereby, itrefines the emerging literature on the integrative view for the management of tensions in corporate sustainability.The framework also provides managerswith a better understanding of tensions in corporate sustainability and enables them to embrace these tensions in their decision-making.
Business Strategy and The Environment, 2010
This paper considers the complex relationships between the human and ecological elements of sustainability that exist in the minds of stakeholders and argues that a sensemaking approach allows these to be better understood and compared. This is supported by the results of a study, set in a financial institution, exploring the relationships between these non-financial elements of corporate sustainability. The viewpoints of middle management, branch and contact centre employees, executives, a community consultative council, suppliers and a community partner of a large Australian bank obtained in in-depth interviews are analysed and compared utilizing an innovative methodology of semantic analysis. We find that these stakeholders' perceptions of the human–ecological relationship differ by group, containing different mixes of trade-offs and synergies between the non-financial elements of corporate sustainability. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.