培养消费者的矛盾心态:理解可持续发展中的紧张关系

Q1 Business, Management and Accounting
Claire Beach, Sitong Michelle Chen, Michael S. W. Lee
{"title":"培养消费者的矛盾心态:理解可持续发展中的紧张关系","authors":"Claire Beach,&nbsp;Sitong Michelle Chen,&nbsp;Michael S. W. Lee","doi":"10.1007/s13162-025-00304-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Greening, or adopting sustainable business practices, requires firms to balance economic, environmental, and social goals, which often creates tensions in sustainability. Firms frequently employ paradoxical logic to manage these tensions, pursuing these objectives simultaneously and without prioritization. However, using paradoxical logic may make it difficult for firms to communicate their greening initiatives to consumers. Messages that conflict with consumers' existing mental frameworks may amplify perceived tensions, arousing cognitive dissonance. Consumers with limited paradox mindsets may be unable to make sense of these tensions or tolerate their cognitive dissonance, prompting them to avoid or exit the firm or question its commitment to greening. To reduce these risks, greening firms need to consider and actively develop consumers’ paradox mindsets when crafting their sustainability communications. This paper draws on connections between cognitive dissonance and sensemaking to develop a conceptual model that illustrates how greening firms can develop consumers’ paradox mindsets. Through this iterative process, firms challenge consumers’ existing mental frameworks and offer sense-giving narratives that reframe tensions in sustainability as interdependent and complementary, reducing consumers’ cognitive dissonance. By tailoring their messages to align with consumers’ varying receptivity to paradoxical logic and sensitivity to tensions in sustainability, greening firms can craft coherent narratives that promote consumer engagement with the sensemaking process. When this process is successful, greening firms can develop consumers’ paradox mindsets and, thus, their ability to make sense of tensions in sustainability. This paper extends the literature on paradox mindset development from managers and employees to firm-consumer communications.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7786,"journal":{"name":"AMS Review","volume":"15 1-2","pages":"289 - 300"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s13162-025-00304-1.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Developing consumers’ paradox mindsets: Making sense of tensions in sustainability\",\"authors\":\"Claire Beach,&nbsp;Sitong Michelle Chen,&nbsp;Michael S. W. Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s13162-025-00304-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Greening, or adopting sustainable business practices, requires firms to balance economic, environmental, and social goals, which often creates tensions in sustainability. Firms frequently employ paradoxical logic to manage these tensions, pursuing these objectives simultaneously and without prioritization. However, using paradoxical logic may make it difficult for firms to communicate their greening initiatives to consumers. Messages that conflict with consumers' existing mental frameworks may amplify perceived tensions, arousing cognitive dissonance. Consumers with limited paradox mindsets may be unable to make sense of these tensions or tolerate their cognitive dissonance, prompting them to avoid or exit the firm or question its commitment to greening. To reduce these risks, greening firms need to consider and actively develop consumers’ paradox mindsets when crafting their sustainability communications. This paper draws on connections between cognitive dissonance and sensemaking to develop a conceptual model that illustrates how greening firms can develop consumers’ paradox mindsets. Through this iterative process, firms challenge consumers’ existing mental frameworks and offer sense-giving narratives that reframe tensions in sustainability as interdependent and complementary, reducing consumers’ cognitive dissonance. By tailoring their messages to align with consumers’ varying receptivity to paradoxical logic and sensitivity to tensions in sustainability, greening firms can craft coherent narratives that promote consumer engagement with the sensemaking process. When this process is successful, greening firms can develop consumers’ paradox mindsets and, thus, their ability to make sense of tensions in sustainability. This paper extends the literature on paradox mindset development from managers and employees to firm-consumer communications.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7786,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AMS Review\",\"volume\":\"15 1-2\",\"pages\":\"289 - 300\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s13162-025-00304-1.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AMS Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13162-025-00304-1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Business, Management and Accounting\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AMS Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13162-025-00304-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Business, Management and Accounting","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

绿化,或采用可持续的商业实践,要求企业平衡经济、环境和社会目标,这通常会在可持续性方面造成紧张关系。公司经常使用矛盾的逻辑来管理这些紧张关系,同时追求这些目标,没有优先顺序。然而,使用矛盾的逻辑可能会使企业难以向消费者传达他们的绿色倡议。与消费者现有心理框架相冲突的信息可能会放大感知到的紧张,引起认知失调。具有有限悖论心态的消费者可能无法理解这些紧张关系或容忍他们的认知失调,促使他们避开或退出公司,或质疑其对环保的承诺。为了减少这些风险,绿色企业在制定可持续发展宣传时需要考虑并积极培养消费者的矛盾心态。本文利用认知失调和语义制造之间的联系,建立了一个概念模型,说明绿色企业如何发展消费者的悖论心态。通过这一迭代过程,企业挑战消费者现有的心理框架,并提供具有意义的叙述,将可持续性的紧张关系重新定义为相互依存和互补,减少消费者的认知失调。通过调整他们的信息,使其与消费者对矛盾逻辑的不同接受度和对可持续性紧张关系的敏感性保持一致,绿色公司可以制作连贯的叙述,促进消费者参与到制造过程中。当这一过程取得成功时,绿色公司可以培养消费者的矛盾心态,从而提高他们理解可持续发展紧张关系的能力。本文将悖论思维发展的文献从管理者和员工扩展到企业与消费者之间的沟通。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Developing consumers’ paradox mindsets: Making sense of tensions in sustainability

Greening, or adopting sustainable business practices, requires firms to balance economic, environmental, and social goals, which often creates tensions in sustainability. Firms frequently employ paradoxical logic to manage these tensions, pursuing these objectives simultaneously and without prioritization. However, using paradoxical logic may make it difficult for firms to communicate their greening initiatives to consumers. Messages that conflict with consumers' existing mental frameworks may amplify perceived tensions, arousing cognitive dissonance. Consumers with limited paradox mindsets may be unable to make sense of these tensions or tolerate their cognitive dissonance, prompting them to avoid or exit the firm or question its commitment to greening. To reduce these risks, greening firms need to consider and actively develop consumers’ paradox mindsets when crafting their sustainability communications. This paper draws on connections between cognitive dissonance and sensemaking to develop a conceptual model that illustrates how greening firms can develop consumers’ paradox mindsets. Through this iterative process, firms challenge consumers’ existing mental frameworks and offer sense-giving narratives that reframe tensions in sustainability as interdependent and complementary, reducing consumers’ cognitive dissonance. By tailoring their messages to align with consumers’ varying receptivity to paradoxical logic and sensitivity to tensions in sustainability, greening firms can craft coherent narratives that promote consumer engagement with the sensemaking process. When this process is successful, greening firms can develop consumers’ paradox mindsets and, thus, their ability to make sense of tensions in sustainability. This paper extends the literature on paradox mindset development from managers and employees to firm-consumer communications.

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
AMS Review
AMS Review Business, Management and Accounting-Marketing
CiteScore
14.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: The AMS Review is positioned to be the premier journal in marketing that focuses exclusively on conceptual contributions across all sub-disciplines of marketing. It publishes articles that advance the development of market and marketing theory.The AMS Review is receptive to different philosophical perspectives and levels of analysis that range from micro to macro. Especially welcome are manuscripts that integrate research and theory from non-marketing disciplines such as management, sociology, economics, psychology, geography, anthropology, or other social sciences. Examples of suitable manuscripts include those incorporating conceptual and organizing frameworks or models, those extending, comparing, or critically evaluating existing theories, and those suggesting new or innovative theories. Comprehensive and integrative syntheses of research literatures (including quantitative and qualitative meta-analyses) are encouraged, as are paradigm-shifting manuscripts.Manuscripts that focus on purely descriptive literature reviews, proselytize research methods or techniques, or report empirical research findings will not be considered for publication.  The AMS Review does not publish manuscripts focusing on practitioner advice or marketing education.
×
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