企业可持续发展战略制定中的合法性-承诺悖论

IF 12.5 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS
Rikke Rønholt Albertsen
{"title":"企业可持续发展战略制定中的合法性-承诺悖论","authors":"Rikke Rønholt Albertsen","doi":"10.1002/bse.4131","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Researchers have long problematised the gap between corporations' formulated sustainability strategies and their actual contributions to sustainability. This study draws on 24 months of real‐time observations in a multinational company to explore the origins of this gap in the formulation phase of corporate sustainability (CS) strategy. The findings show that contradictory logics and processes related to (a) gaining external legitimacy and (b) mobilising internal commitment impose paradoxical demands on the formulation process. Strategy makers tackled these tensions through rhetorical ambiguity and temporal separation. However, while these paradox management strategies facilitated coping with conflicting demands and avoiding deadlocks in the formulation process, they also created a commitment vacuum that undermined implementation. This study highlights the role of the formulation phase as an overlooked origin of implementation failure. The findings nuance our understanding of defensive and proactive paradox responses and call for further examination of the unintended outcomes of paradox responses.","PeriodicalId":9518,"journal":{"name":"Business Strategy and The Environment","volume":"86 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":12.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Legitimacy–Commitment Paradox in Corporate Sustainability Strategy Formulation\",\"authors\":\"Rikke Rønholt Albertsen\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/bse.4131\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Researchers have long problematised the gap between corporations' formulated sustainability strategies and their actual contributions to sustainability. This study draws on 24 months of real‐time observations in a multinational company to explore the origins of this gap in the formulation phase of corporate sustainability (CS) strategy. The findings show that contradictory logics and processes related to (a) gaining external legitimacy and (b) mobilising internal commitment impose paradoxical demands on the formulation process. Strategy makers tackled these tensions through rhetorical ambiguity and temporal separation. However, while these paradox management strategies facilitated coping with conflicting demands and avoiding deadlocks in the formulation process, they also created a commitment vacuum that undermined implementation. This study highlights the role of the formulation phase as an overlooked origin of implementation failure. The findings nuance our understanding of defensive and proactive paradox responses and call for further examination of the unintended outcomes of paradox responses.\",\"PeriodicalId\":9518,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Business Strategy and The Environment\",\"volume\":\"86 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":12.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Business Strategy and The Environment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.4131\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Business Strategy and The Environment","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.4131","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

长期以来,研究人员一直对企业制定的可持续发展战略与其对可持续发展的实际贡献之间的差距提出质疑。本研究在一家跨国公司进行了24个月的实时观察,以探索企业可持续发展(CS)战略制定阶段这种差距的根源。研究结果表明,与(a)获得外部合法性和(b)调动内部承诺相关的矛盾逻辑和过程对制定过程提出了矛盾的要求。战略制定者通过修辞歧义和时间分离来解决这些紧张关系。然而,虽然这些悖论管理策略有助于处理相互冲突的需求并避免在制定过程中陷入僵局,但它们也造成了承诺真空,从而破坏了实施。本研究强调了制定阶段作为实施失败的一个被忽视的根源的作用。这些发现使我们对防御性和主动性悖论反应的理解有了细微差别,并呼吁进一步研究悖论反应的意外结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Legitimacy–Commitment Paradox in Corporate Sustainability Strategy Formulation
Researchers have long problematised the gap between corporations' formulated sustainability strategies and their actual contributions to sustainability. This study draws on 24 months of real‐time observations in a multinational company to explore the origins of this gap in the formulation phase of corporate sustainability (CS) strategy. The findings show that contradictory logics and processes related to (a) gaining external legitimacy and (b) mobilising internal commitment impose paradoxical demands on the formulation process. Strategy makers tackled these tensions through rhetorical ambiguity and temporal separation. However, while these paradox management strategies facilitated coping with conflicting demands and avoiding deadlocks in the formulation process, they also created a commitment vacuum that undermined implementation. This study highlights the role of the formulation phase as an overlooked origin of implementation failure. The findings nuance our understanding of defensive and proactive paradox responses and call for further examination of the unintended outcomes of paradox responses.
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
CiteScore
22.50
自引率
19.40%
发文量
336
期刊介绍: Business Strategy and the Environment (BSE) is a leading academic journal focused on business strategies for improving the natural environment. It publishes peer-reviewed research on various topics such as systems and standards, environmental performance, disclosure, eco-innovation, corporate environmental management tools, organizations and management, supply chains, circular economy, governance, green finance, industry sectors, and responses to climate change and other contemporary environmental issues. The journal aims to provide original contributions that enhance the understanding of sustainability in business. Its target audience includes academics, practitioners, business managers, and consultants. However, BSE does not accept papers on corporate social responsibility (CSR), as this topic is covered by its sibling journal Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. The journal is indexed in several databases and collections such as ABI/INFORM Collection, Agricultural & Environmental Science Database, BIOBASE, Emerald Management Reviews, GeoArchive, Environment Index, GEOBASE, INSPEC, Technology Collection, and Web of Science.
×
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