Sustainable Development in Practice: Case Study of L’Oréal

Pradit Withisuphakorn, Ishita Batra, Nakul Parameswar, Sanjay Dhir
{"title":"Sustainable Development in Practice: Case Study of L’Oréal","authors":"Pradit Withisuphakorn, Ishita Batra, Nakul Parameswar, Sanjay Dhir","doi":"10.24052/JBRMR/V13ISSP/ART-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: This paper attempts to analyze sustainable development initiatives undertaken by businesses and discuss them in relation to the literature on sustainable development and triple bottom line. Extant literature lacks studies that provide a detailed account of the application of sustainable development initiatives in the real business case. Methodology: The paper utilizes a case study methodology to understand the method by which sustainable development is efficiently pursued by an organization. The case of sustainable development efforts pursued by L’Oréal is discussed. Findings: L’Oréal effectively pursues sustainable development initiatives without compromising on its economic prosperity. Moreover, it is evident that organizations must embed sustainable development principles in all their activities in order to achieve the triple bottom line. Practical Implications: The paper contributes to the practitioners by providing a detailed account of the ways and means by which sustainable development is efficiently pursued by an organization. This can act as a guideline for decision making in a different business context for taking up sustainable development initiatives. Research Implications: The paper provides a practical approach for taking up research on sustainable development forward and suggests that future research must incorporate business cases as a method to discuss the implementation of sustainable development activities. Social Implications: This paper attempts to bring forward a business case wherein sustainable development is pursued and provide evidence to demonstrate that sustainable development is possible. Originality/Value: This paper is amongst the few papers that go beyond the theoretical and empirical assessment of sustainable development. The case analysis determines that sustainable development must be an organization-wide initiative and requires a long-term commitment to being successful. Corresponding author: Ishita Batra Email addresses for the corresponding author: ishita.iitdelhi@gmail.com First submission received: 14th February 2019 Revised submission received: 20th April 2019 Accepted: 23rd April 2019 Introduction Corporate sustainable development is an important area of research ever since the World Commission on Economic Development called for Sustainable Development (Bansal, 2005; Diamond, 1996; Dubey et al., 2017). Sustainable development has three guiding principles – Environmental Integrity, Social Equity and Economic Prosperity that make up the important concept of ‘Triple Bottom Line’ that Journal of Business and Retail Management Research (JBRMR), Volume 13, Special Issue May 2019 www.jbrmr.com A Journal of the Academy of Business and Retail Management (ABRM) 36 governs business in the 21st Century (Chavan, 2005; Gimenez, Sierra, & Rodon, 2012; Hacking & Guthrie, 2008; Jamali, 2008; Norman & Macdonald, 2004). Businesses are striving to gain economic prosperity through value creation, social equity by corporate social responsibility initiatives and environmental integrity by ensuring minimal environment damage in its operations (Bansal, 2005; Dubey, Gunasekaran, & Chakrabarty, 2015; Mohan Das Gandhi, Selladurai, & Santhi, 2006; Sharfman & Fernando, 2008; Stubbs & Cocklin, 2008). Corporate sustainability initiatives are driven either by the resources of the business (Barney, 1991; Sanjay Dhir & Batra, 2018; Eisenhardt & Schoonhoven, 1996; Harrison, Hitt, Hoskisson, & Ireland, 2001) or by the need for societal acceptance (Felin, T, Foss, N.J., Ployhart, 2015; Meyer & Rowan, 1977; Rowley, Shipilov, & Greve, 2017; Scott, 1987). Moreover, sustainable enterprise performance is gained through sustainable corporate development facilitated by dynamic capabilities of the organization (Sanjay Dhir & Dhir, 2015; Swati Dhir & Dhir, 2018; Raisch, Birkinshaw, Probst, & Tushman, 2009; Teece, 2007; Wamba et al., 2017). This further allows businesses to achieve sustainable competitive advantage in the long run – the ultimate aim for organizations (Charles Jr, Schmidheiny, & Watts, 2017a; Sanjay Dhir & Mital, 2013; Dubey, Gunasekaran, Sushil, & Singh, 2015; Parameswar, Dhir, & Dhir, 2017; Saeidi, Sofian, Saeidi, Saeidi, & Saaeidi, 2015). Researchers have scantly explored the methods by which businesses ensure to meet the three guiding principles of sustainable development– environment integrity, social equity and economic prosperity (Charles Jr, Schmidheiny, & Watts, 2017b; Elkington, 1994; Giddings, Hopwood, & G., 2002; Gupta & Racherla, 2018; Redclift, 2005; Swanson & Zhang, 2012). Further, sustainable development is an organization-wide effort, a matter of corporate importance that is provided for by the top management of the organization (Bansal, 2002, 2005; Montiel & Delgado-Ceballos, 2014; Parameswar & Dhir, 2019a; Perrini, Russo, Tencati, & Vurro, 2011). However, such research efforts do not provide a clear understanding of the way businesses strive to gain sustainable development without compromising on any front – profits, environment and society (Elkington, 1994; Dhir, Aniruddha, & Mital, 2014; Hall, Daneke, & Lenox, 2010; Husser, André, Barbat, & Lespinet-Najib, 2012; Flexibility and Sustainability pp. 77– 87; Parameswar & Dhir, 2019b; Svensson & Wagner, 2011). This paper provides a detailed analysis of the ways and means by which a renowned cosmetics business organization – L’Oréal undertakes sustainable development. The choice of business in the cosmetics industry is driven by two reasons. Firstly, the cosmetics industry is considered to be environmentally unfriendly and highly profitable (Dhir, 2017; Dhir & Mital, 2013a; Kate & Laird, 2000; Parameswar & Dhir, 2018; Sahota, 2014; Secchi, Castellani, Collina, Mirabella, & Sala, 2016). Secondly, there are few businesses in this industry that comply with sustainable development goals and have gained a sustainable competitive advantage. A detailed examination of L’Oréal that has embedded sustainable development in each and every dimension of its working provides an exemplary model for sustainable development that can be adopted by other businesses. The detailed literature review on the need for sustainable development, triple bottom line and sustaining sustainable development allows the reader to comprehend the actions of the business in light of the concepts. Finally, the paper concludes with implications, future research, and limitations. Literature Review The word ‘sustainability’ was first used in the literature on forestry, where it means we should not harvest higher than what the forest yields in new growth (Boyko, Cooper, Davey, & Wootton, 2006; Kuhlman & Farrington, 2010; Wiersum, 1995). The concern was about preserving the natural resources for the future. The foundation of sustainability is inferred from its definition – meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations for meeting their own needs (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987). The main principle of sustainability is to secure intergenerational equity (Dhir, 2016a; Gladwin, Kennelly, & Krause, 1995). The same logic applies to business, which is about their attempts to manage the impact of their businesses on the environment (Anbarasan & Sushil, 2018; Grewatsch & Kleindienst, 2017). Extant literature argues that sustainability is related to three shared elements – economic, social and environmental considerations (Dyllick & Hockerts, 2002; Kuhlman & Farrington, 2010; Milne & Gray, 2013; Pawłowski, 2008). These three elements mutually reinforce each other, and economic growth and social well-being are underpinned by environmental concerns, and vice versa (Dhir & Mital, 2012; Kuhlman & Farrington, 2010; Pawłowski, 2008; Wood et al., Journal of Business and Retail Management Research (JBRMR), Volume 13, Special Issue May 2019 www.jbrmr.com A Journal of the Academy of Business and Retail Management (ABRM) 37 2015). The next aspect of sustainability by the business is the expectation of going over and above regulatory compliance to promote innovation and encourage continuous performance improvement (Dhir, 2016b; Halme & Korpela, 2014; Seyfang & Smith, 2007; Starik & Rands, 1995). Thus, the organization identifies a part of the society, the environment and the economic activities (Proto, Malandrino, & Supino, 2007; Satyro, Sacomano, Contador, Almeida, & Giannetti, 2017). The sustainable enterprise is the one which focuses on these factors of sustainable development rather than the traditional focus on the economic gains (Baumgartner & Rauter, 2017; Benn & Baker, 2009; Leon, 2013). Thus, an organization collectively emphasizing economic, societal and environmental well-being is a sustainable organization (Hart & Milstein, 2003). These three dimensions – economic, social and environmental benefits manifest from the Triple Bottom Line concept (Elkington, 1994). The triple bottom line includes the 3Ps – ‘People, Profits, Planet'. The literature argues that the 3Ps are a mechanism of addressing the social, economic and environmental discourse communities (Parameswar, Singh, Malik & Dhir, 2018; Webber, Frost, Line, & 2013, 2004; Wexler, 2009). The approaches adopted for sustainable development by different firms would be different; however, the underlying intention is the same. One of the modern approaches adopted by firms is stakeholder's theory approach. According to this theory, stakeholders of a firm include internal (employees, management and owners) and external individual/groups (customers, suppliers, and local communities) (Anbarasan & Sushil, 2018; Freeman, 2010). Literature suggests that the responsibility of stakeholders lies in the hands of top management in the form of three dimensions discussed below. Environmental Factors The literature on sustainability argues that environment plays a pertinent role in production and consumption pattern (Anbarasan & Sushil, 2018; Giddings et al., 2002; Goodland, 1995).","PeriodicalId":236465,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Business & Retail Management Research","volume":"161 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Business & Retail Management Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24052/JBRMR/V13ISSP/ART-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

Abstract

Purpose: This paper attempts to analyze sustainable development initiatives undertaken by businesses and discuss them in relation to the literature on sustainable development and triple bottom line. Extant literature lacks studies that provide a detailed account of the application of sustainable development initiatives in the real business case. Methodology: The paper utilizes a case study methodology to understand the method by which sustainable development is efficiently pursued by an organization. The case of sustainable development efforts pursued by L’Oréal is discussed. Findings: L’Oréal effectively pursues sustainable development initiatives without compromising on its economic prosperity. Moreover, it is evident that organizations must embed sustainable development principles in all their activities in order to achieve the triple bottom line. Practical Implications: The paper contributes to the practitioners by providing a detailed account of the ways and means by which sustainable development is efficiently pursued by an organization. This can act as a guideline for decision making in a different business context for taking up sustainable development initiatives. Research Implications: The paper provides a practical approach for taking up research on sustainable development forward and suggests that future research must incorporate business cases as a method to discuss the implementation of sustainable development activities. Social Implications: This paper attempts to bring forward a business case wherein sustainable development is pursued and provide evidence to demonstrate that sustainable development is possible. Originality/Value: This paper is amongst the few papers that go beyond the theoretical and empirical assessment of sustainable development. The case analysis determines that sustainable development must be an organization-wide initiative and requires a long-term commitment to being successful. Corresponding author: Ishita Batra Email addresses for the corresponding author: ishita.iitdelhi@gmail.com First submission received: 14th February 2019 Revised submission received: 20th April 2019 Accepted: 23rd April 2019 Introduction Corporate sustainable development is an important area of research ever since the World Commission on Economic Development called for Sustainable Development (Bansal, 2005; Diamond, 1996; Dubey et al., 2017). Sustainable development has three guiding principles – Environmental Integrity, Social Equity and Economic Prosperity that make up the important concept of ‘Triple Bottom Line’ that Journal of Business and Retail Management Research (JBRMR), Volume 13, Special Issue May 2019 www.jbrmr.com A Journal of the Academy of Business and Retail Management (ABRM) 36 governs business in the 21st Century (Chavan, 2005; Gimenez, Sierra, & Rodon, 2012; Hacking & Guthrie, 2008; Jamali, 2008; Norman & Macdonald, 2004). Businesses are striving to gain economic prosperity through value creation, social equity by corporate social responsibility initiatives and environmental integrity by ensuring minimal environment damage in its operations (Bansal, 2005; Dubey, Gunasekaran, & Chakrabarty, 2015; Mohan Das Gandhi, Selladurai, & Santhi, 2006; Sharfman & Fernando, 2008; Stubbs & Cocklin, 2008). Corporate sustainability initiatives are driven either by the resources of the business (Barney, 1991; Sanjay Dhir & Batra, 2018; Eisenhardt & Schoonhoven, 1996; Harrison, Hitt, Hoskisson, & Ireland, 2001) or by the need for societal acceptance (Felin, T, Foss, N.J., Ployhart, 2015; Meyer & Rowan, 1977; Rowley, Shipilov, & Greve, 2017; Scott, 1987). Moreover, sustainable enterprise performance is gained through sustainable corporate development facilitated by dynamic capabilities of the organization (Sanjay Dhir & Dhir, 2015; Swati Dhir & Dhir, 2018; Raisch, Birkinshaw, Probst, & Tushman, 2009; Teece, 2007; Wamba et al., 2017). This further allows businesses to achieve sustainable competitive advantage in the long run – the ultimate aim for organizations (Charles Jr, Schmidheiny, & Watts, 2017a; Sanjay Dhir & Mital, 2013; Dubey, Gunasekaran, Sushil, & Singh, 2015; Parameswar, Dhir, & Dhir, 2017; Saeidi, Sofian, Saeidi, Saeidi, & Saaeidi, 2015). Researchers have scantly explored the methods by which businesses ensure to meet the three guiding principles of sustainable development– environment integrity, social equity and economic prosperity (Charles Jr, Schmidheiny, & Watts, 2017b; Elkington, 1994; Giddings, Hopwood, & G., 2002; Gupta & Racherla, 2018; Redclift, 2005; Swanson & Zhang, 2012). Further, sustainable development is an organization-wide effort, a matter of corporate importance that is provided for by the top management of the organization (Bansal, 2002, 2005; Montiel & Delgado-Ceballos, 2014; Parameswar & Dhir, 2019a; Perrini, Russo, Tencati, & Vurro, 2011). However, such research efforts do not provide a clear understanding of the way businesses strive to gain sustainable development without compromising on any front – profits, environment and society (Elkington, 1994; Dhir, Aniruddha, & Mital, 2014; Hall, Daneke, & Lenox, 2010; Husser, André, Barbat, & Lespinet-Najib, 2012; Flexibility and Sustainability pp. 77– 87; Parameswar & Dhir, 2019b; Svensson & Wagner, 2011). This paper provides a detailed analysis of the ways and means by which a renowned cosmetics business organization – L’Oréal undertakes sustainable development. The choice of business in the cosmetics industry is driven by two reasons. Firstly, the cosmetics industry is considered to be environmentally unfriendly and highly profitable (Dhir, 2017; Dhir & Mital, 2013a; Kate & Laird, 2000; Parameswar & Dhir, 2018; Sahota, 2014; Secchi, Castellani, Collina, Mirabella, & Sala, 2016). Secondly, there are few businesses in this industry that comply with sustainable development goals and have gained a sustainable competitive advantage. A detailed examination of L’Oréal that has embedded sustainable development in each and every dimension of its working provides an exemplary model for sustainable development that can be adopted by other businesses. The detailed literature review on the need for sustainable development, triple bottom line and sustaining sustainable development allows the reader to comprehend the actions of the business in light of the concepts. Finally, the paper concludes with implications, future research, and limitations. Literature Review The word ‘sustainability’ was first used in the literature on forestry, where it means we should not harvest higher than what the forest yields in new growth (Boyko, Cooper, Davey, & Wootton, 2006; Kuhlman & Farrington, 2010; Wiersum, 1995). The concern was about preserving the natural resources for the future. The foundation of sustainability is inferred from its definition – meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations for meeting their own needs (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987). The main principle of sustainability is to secure intergenerational equity (Dhir, 2016a; Gladwin, Kennelly, & Krause, 1995). The same logic applies to business, which is about their attempts to manage the impact of their businesses on the environment (Anbarasan & Sushil, 2018; Grewatsch & Kleindienst, 2017). Extant literature argues that sustainability is related to three shared elements – economic, social and environmental considerations (Dyllick & Hockerts, 2002; Kuhlman & Farrington, 2010; Milne & Gray, 2013; Pawłowski, 2008). These three elements mutually reinforce each other, and economic growth and social well-being are underpinned by environmental concerns, and vice versa (Dhir & Mital, 2012; Kuhlman & Farrington, 2010; Pawłowski, 2008; Wood et al., Journal of Business and Retail Management Research (JBRMR), Volume 13, Special Issue May 2019 www.jbrmr.com A Journal of the Academy of Business and Retail Management (ABRM) 37 2015). The next aspect of sustainability by the business is the expectation of going over and above regulatory compliance to promote innovation and encourage continuous performance improvement (Dhir, 2016b; Halme & Korpela, 2014; Seyfang & Smith, 2007; Starik & Rands, 1995). Thus, the organization identifies a part of the society, the environment and the economic activities (Proto, Malandrino, & Supino, 2007; Satyro, Sacomano, Contador, Almeida, & Giannetti, 2017). The sustainable enterprise is the one which focuses on these factors of sustainable development rather than the traditional focus on the economic gains (Baumgartner & Rauter, 2017; Benn & Baker, 2009; Leon, 2013). Thus, an organization collectively emphasizing economic, societal and environmental well-being is a sustainable organization (Hart & Milstein, 2003). These three dimensions – economic, social and environmental benefits manifest from the Triple Bottom Line concept (Elkington, 1994). The triple bottom line includes the 3Ps – ‘People, Profits, Planet'. The literature argues that the 3Ps are a mechanism of addressing the social, economic and environmental discourse communities (Parameswar, Singh, Malik & Dhir, 2018; Webber, Frost, Line, & 2013, 2004; Wexler, 2009). The approaches adopted for sustainable development by different firms would be different; however, the underlying intention is the same. One of the modern approaches adopted by firms is stakeholder's theory approach. According to this theory, stakeholders of a firm include internal (employees, management and owners) and external individual/groups (customers, suppliers, and local communities) (Anbarasan & Sushil, 2018; Freeman, 2010). Literature suggests that the responsibility of stakeholders lies in the hands of top management in the form of three dimensions discussed below. Environmental Factors The literature on sustainability argues that environment plays a pertinent role in production and consumption pattern (Anbarasan & Sushil, 2018; Giddings et al., 2002; Goodland, 1995).
可持续发展在实践中的应用:以欧莱雅为例
目的:本文试图分析企业所采取的可持续发展举措,并结合可持续发展和三重底线的文献进行讨论。现有文献缺乏对可持续发展倡议在实际商业案例中的应用提供详细说明的研究。方法论:本文运用案例研究的方法论来理解一个组织有效地追求可持续发展的方法。文中讨论了欧莱雅集团所进行的可持续发展努力。调查结果:欧莱雅在不损害其经济繁荣的情况下有效地推行可持续发展倡议。此外,很明显,组织必须将可持续发展原则融入其所有活动中,以实现三重底线。实际意义:本文通过提供一个组织有效地追求可持续发展的方法和手段的详细说明,为实践者做出了贡献。这可以作为在不同业务环境中采取可持续发展举措的决策指南。研究启示:本文为开展可持续发展研究提供了一种实用的方法,并建议未来的研究必须将商业案例作为讨论可持续发展活动实施的一种方法。社会影响:本文试图提出一个可持续发展的商业案例,并提供证据来证明可持续发展是可能的。原创性/价值:本文是为数不多的超越可持续发展理论和实证评估的论文之一。案例分析表明,可持续发展必须是一个组织范围内的倡议,需要长期的承诺才能取得成功。通讯作者:Ishita Batra通讯作者电子邮件地址:ishita.iitdelhi@gmail.com首次提交:2019年2月14日修订提交:2019年4月20日接受:2019年4月23日引言自世界经济发展委员会呼吁可持续发展以来,企业可持续发展是一个重要的研究领域(班萨尔,2005;钻石,1996;Dubey等人,2017)。可持续发展有三个指导原则-环境完整性,社会公平和经济繁荣,构成了“三重底线”的重要概念,商业和零售管理研究杂志(JBRMR),第13卷,特刊2019年5月www.jbrmr.com商业和零售管理学院学报(ABRM) 36管理21世纪的商业(Chavan, 2005;Gimenez, Sierra, & Rodon, 2012;Hacking & Guthrie, 2008;贾玛利,2008;Norman & Macdonald, 2004)。企业正努力通过创造价值来获得经济繁荣,通过企业社会责任倡议来实现社会公平,通过确保运营中对环境的破坏最小化来实现环境完整性(Bansal, 2005;Dubey, Gunasekaran, & Chakrabarty, 2015;Mohan Das Gandhi, Selladurai, & Santhi, 2006;Sharfman & Fernando, 2008;Stubbs & Cocklin, 2008)。企业可持续发展举措要么是由企业的资源驱动的(Barney, 1991;Sanjay Dhir & Batra, 2018;Eisenhardt & Schoonhoven, 1996;Harrison, Hitt, Hoskisson, & Ireland, 2001)或社会接受的需要(Felin, T, Foss, n.j., Ployhart, 2015;Meyer & Rowan, 1977;Rowley, Shipilov, & Greve, 2017;斯科特,1987)。此外,可持续的企业绩效是通过组织的动态能力促进可持续的企业发展来获得的(Sanjay Dhir & Dhir, 2015;Swati Dhir & Dhir, 2018;柏金肖,普罗布斯特和图什曼,2009;蒂斯,2007;Wamba et al., 2017)。这进一步使企业能够在长期内实现可持续的竞争优势——这是组织的最终目标(Charles Jr, Schmidheiny, & Watts, 2017a;Sanjay Dhir & mittal, 2013;Dubey, Gunasekaran, Sushil, & Singh, 2015;Parameswar, Dhir, & Dhir, 2017;Saeidi, Sofian, Saeidi, Saeidi, & Saaeidi, 2015)。研究人员很少探索企业如何确保满足可持续发展的三个指导原则-环境完整性,社会公平和经济繁荣(Charles Jr, Schmidheiny, & Watts, 2017b);Elkington, 1994;吉丁斯,霍普伍德,& G, 2002;Gupta & Racherla, 2018;Redclift, 2005;Swanson & Zhang, 2012)。此外,可持续发展是一项组织范围内的努力,是由组织最高管理层提供的企业重要性问题(Bansal, 2002, 2005;Montiel & Delgado-Ceballos, 2014;Parameswar & Dhir, 2019;Perrini, Russo, Tencati, & Vurro, 2011)。 然而,这样的研究努力并没有提供一个清晰的理解方式,企业努力获得可持续发展,而不妥协任何前线利润,环境和社会(Elkington, 1994;Dhir, Aniruddha, & mittal, 2014;Hall, Daneke, & Lenox, 2010;胡瑟,安德列尔,巴巴特,和勒斯皮奈-纳吉布,2012;灵活性和可持续性第77 - 87页;pareswar & Dhir, 2019;Svensson & Wagner, 2011)。本文详细分析了著名化妆品企业欧莱雅集团实现可持续发展的途径和手段。化妆品行业的业务选择是由两个原因驱动的。首先,化妆品行业被认为是环境不友好和高利润的(Dhir, 2017;Dhir & mittal, 2013;Kate & Laird, 2000;Parameswar & Dhir, 2018;Sahota, 2014;Secchi, Castellani, Collina, Mirabella, & Sala, 2016)。其次,该行业符合可持续发展目标并获得可持续竞争优势的企业很少。对将可持续发展融入其工作的每一个方面的L ' oracimal的详细审查提供了一个可持续发展的典范,可供其他企业采用。关于可持续发展的必要性、三重底线和持续可持续发展的详细文献综述使读者能够根据这些概念理解企业的行动。最后,本文总结了研究的启示、未来的研究方向和局限性。“可持续性”一词最初是在林业文献中使用的,它意味着我们不应该收获高于新生长的森林产量(Boyko, Cooper, Davey, & Wootton, 2006;Kuhlman & Farrington, 2010;Wiersum, 1995)。人们关心的是如何为未来保护自然资源。可持续性的基础是从其定义中推断出来的- -满足目前的需要而不损害后代人满足其自身需要的能力(世界环境与发展委员会,1987年)。可持续性的主要原则是确保代际公平(Dhir, 2016a;Gladwin, Kennelly, & Krause, 1995)。同样的逻辑也适用于商业,这是关于他们试图管理其业务对环境的影响(Anbarasan & Sushil, 2018;Grewatsch & Kleindienst, 2017)。现存文献认为,可持续性与三个共同因素有关——经济、社会和环境因素(dyllick&hockerts, 2002;Kuhlman & Farrington, 2010;Milne & Gray, 2013;爪子łowski, 2008)。这三个要素相互加强,经济增长和社会福祉的基础是环境问题,反之亦然(Dhir & mittal, 2012;Kuhlman & Farrington, 2010;爪子łowski, 2008;Wood等人,《商业与零售管理研究杂志》(JBRMR),第13卷,2019年5月特刊www.jbrmr.com《商业与零售管理学会杂志》(ABRM) 37 2015)。企业可持续发展的下一个方面是期望超越法规合规性,以促进创新和鼓励持续的绩效改进(Dhir, 2016b;Halme & Korpela, 2014;塞方&史密斯,2007;斯塔里克和兰德,1995)。因此,组织确定了社会,环境和经济活动的一部分(Proto, Malandrino, & Supino, 2007;Satyro, Sacomano, Contador, Almeida, & Giannetti, 2017)。可持续发展的企业是关注这些可持续发展的因素,而不是传统的关注经济收益的企业(Baumgartner & Rauter, 2017;Benn & Baker, 2009;里昂,2013)。因此,一个共同强调经济、社会和环境福祉的组织是一个可持续发展的组织(Hart & Milstein, 2003)。这三个维度——经济、社会和环境效益体现在三重底线概念中(Elkington, 1994)。三重底线包括3p——“人、利润、地球”。文献认为3p是一种解决社会、经济和环境话语社区的机制(Parameswar, Singh, Malik & Dhir, 2018;韦伯,弗罗斯特,莱恩,2013,2004;Wexler, 2009)。不同的公司为可持续发展所采取的办法是不同的;然而,潜在的意图是相同的。企业采用的现代方法之一是利益相关者理论方法。根据这一理论,企业的利益相关者包括内部(员工、管理层和所有者)和外部个人/团体(客户、供应商和当地社区)(Anbarasan & Sushil, 2018;弗里曼,2010)。文献表明,利益相关者的责任以以下讨论的三个维度的形式掌握在最高管理层手中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信