{"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}
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.
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.