玩双重游戏:在道德市场中,生态企业家如何应对对立的场逻辑

Lisa Suckert
{"title":"玩双重游戏:在道德市场中,生态企业家如何应对对立的场逻辑","authors":"Lisa Suckert","doi":"10.1108/S0733-558X20190000063014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Moralized markets are economic markets in which moral aspects are explicitly used to legitimize decisions. Companies involved in such markets have to cope simultaneously with opposing logics: While they strive for economic growth, their existence is bound to their moral integrity, too. This chapter investigates how ecopreneurs manage this inherent conflict of moralized markets. Based on interviews, documentary analysis and sample purchases, an empirical case study highlights the example of well-renowned ecopreneurial dairies distributing their milk via ecologically disreputable discount stores. By looking into the related struggle between moral and economic expectations, the chapter sheds light on one particular coping strategy: The tacit creation and maintenance of separate fields for moral and economic logics. This strategy of fragmentation is referred to as ‘double game.’ The study emanates from competing logics approaches to hybrid organizations by adopting a field theoretical, Bourdieusian perspective. Its explicit focus on opposing logics and on coping strategies that go beyond reconciliation opens up new perspectives for both sustainability and organization studies.","PeriodicalId":180121,"journal":{"name":"The Contested Moralities of Markets","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Playing the Double Game: How Ecopreneurs Cope with Opposing Field Logics in Moralized Markets\",\"authors\":\"Lisa Suckert\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/S0733-558X20190000063014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Moralized markets are economic markets in which moral aspects are explicitly used to legitimize decisions. Companies involved in such markets have to cope simultaneously with opposing logics: While they strive for economic growth, their existence is bound to their moral integrity, too. This chapter investigates how ecopreneurs manage this inherent conflict of moralized markets. Based on interviews, documentary analysis and sample purchases, an empirical case study highlights the example of well-renowned ecopreneurial dairies distributing their milk via ecologically disreputable discount stores. By looking into the related struggle between moral and economic expectations, the chapter sheds light on one particular coping strategy: The tacit creation and maintenance of separate fields for moral and economic logics. This strategy of fragmentation is referred to as ‘double game.’ The study emanates from competing logics approaches to hybrid organizations by adopting a field theoretical, Bourdieusian perspective. Its explicit focus on opposing logics and on coping strategies that go beyond reconciliation opens up new perspectives for both sustainability and organization studies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":180121,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Contested Moralities of Markets\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Contested Moralities of Markets\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/S0733-558X20190000063014\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Contested Moralities of Markets","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/S0733-558X20190000063014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

道德化的市场是一种经济市场,在这种市场中,道德因素被明确地用于使决策合法化。参与此类市场的公司必须同时应对相反的逻辑:它们在努力实现经济增长的同时,它们的存在也与它们的道德诚信息息相关。本章探讨了企业家如何管理道德市场的内在冲突。基于访谈、文献分析和样本购买,一个实证案例研究突出了著名的生态创业乳品公司通过生态声誉不佳的折扣店销售牛奶的例子。本章通过考察道德和经济预期之间的相关斗争,揭示了一种特殊的应对策略:默契地创造和维持道德和经济逻辑的独立领域。这种分散策略被称为“双重游戏”。“这项研究源于对混合组织的竞争逻辑方法,采用了现场理论,布尔迪厄的观点。它明确地关注对立的逻辑和超越和解的应对策略,为可持续性和组织研究开辟了新的视角。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Playing the Double Game: How Ecopreneurs Cope with Opposing Field Logics in Moralized Markets
Moralized markets are economic markets in which moral aspects are explicitly used to legitimize decisions. Companies involved in such markets have to cope simultaneously with opposing logics: While they strive for economic growth, their existence is bound to their moral integrity, too. This chapter investigates how ecopreneurs manage this inherent conflict of moralized markets. Based on interviews, documentary analysis and sample purchases, an empirical case study highlights the example of well-renowned ecopreneurial dairies distributing their milk via ecologically disreputable discount stores. By looking into the related struggle between moral and economic expectations, the chapter sheds light on one particular coping strategy: The tacit creation and maintenance of separate fields for moral and economic logics. This strategy of fragmentation is referred to as ‘double game.’ The study emanates from competing logics approaches to hybrid organizations by adopting a field theoretical, Bourdieusian perspective. Its explicit focus on opposing logics and on coping strategies that go beyond reconciliation opens up new perspectives for both sustainability and organization studies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信