公司如何限制手段与目的脱钩?企业社会责任实施案例比较研究

IF 7 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS Journal of Management Studies Pub Date : 2024-01-24 DOI:10.1111/joms.13043
Andromachi Athanasopoulou, Emilio Marti, David Risi, Eva Schlindwein
{"title":"公司如何限制手段与目的脱钩?企业社会责任实施案例比较研究","authors":"Andromachi Athanasopoulou,&nbsp;Emilio Marti,&nbsp;David Risi,&nbsp;Eva Schlindwein","doi":"10.1111/joms.13043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>We use the concept of means–ends decoupling to examine why companies continue to be major contributors to environmental and social problems despite committing increasingly to corporate social responsibility (CSR). Specifically, we ask: How do companies restrain (versus fail to restrain) means–ends decoupling? We answer this question through a comparative case study of four multinational companies with different levels of means–ends decoupling. Based on interviews and secondary data, we inductively identify two distinct approaches to CSR implementation: experimental vs. consistency-oriented CSR implementation. Experimental CSR implementation means that companies (1) produce CSR knowledge about what is happening in specific CSR contexts and use this knowledge to (2) adapt CSR practices to local circumstances – an interplay that restrains means–ends decoupling. Consistency-oriented CSR implementation lacks this interplay between knowledge production and practice adaptation, which fosters means–ends decoupling. Our model of experimental versus consistency-oriented CSR implementation advances two streams of research. First, we advance research on means–ends decoupling by highlighting the importance of experimentation for restraining means–ends decoupling. Second, we advance research on the impact of CSR activities by questioning the widespread assumption that consistency should be at the heart of CSR implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":48445,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Studies","volume":"62 1","pages":"214-245"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/joms.13043","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How Companies Restrain Means–Ends Decoupling: A Comparative Case Study of CSR Implementation\",\"authors\":\"Andromachi Athanasopoulou,&nbsp;Emilio Marti,&nbsp;David Risi,&nbsp;Eva Schlindwein\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/joms.13043\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>We use the concept of means–ends decoupling to examine why companies continue to be major contributors to environmental and social problems despite committing increasingly to corporate social responsibility (CSR). Specifically, we ask: How do companies restrain (versus fail to restrain) means–ends decoupling? We answer this question through a comparative case study of four multinational companies with different levels of means–ends decoupling. Based on interviews and secondary data, we inductively identify two distinct approaches to CSR implementation: experimental vs. consistency-oriented CSR implementation. Experimental CSR implementation means that companies (1) produce CSR knowledge about what is happening in specific CSR contexts and use this knowledge to (2) adapt CSR practices to local circumstances – an interplay that restrains means–ends decoupling. Consistency-oriented CSR implementation lacks this interplay between knowledge production and practice adaptation, which fosters means–ends decoupling. Our model of experimental versus consistency-oriented CSR implementation advances two streams of research. First, we advance research on means–ends decoupling by highlighting the importance of experimentation for restraining means–ends decoupling. Second, we advance research on the impact of CSR activities by questioning the widespread assumption that consistency should be at the heart of CSR implementation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48445,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Management Studies\",\"volume\":\"62 1\",\"pages\":\"214-245\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/joms.13043\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Management Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/joms.13043\",\"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":"Journal of Management Studies","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/joms.13043","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

我们使用 "手段-目的脱钩 "的概念来研究为什么尽管公司越来越多地承担企业社会责任(CSR),但它们仍然是环境和社会问题的主要制造者。具体来说,我们要问:公司是如何限制(或未能限制)手段-目的脱钩的?我们通过对四家手段与目的脱钩程度不同的跨国公司进行案例比较研究来回答这个问题。根据访谈和二手资料,我们归纳出两种不同的企业社会责任实施方法:实验型企业社会责任实施与一致性导向型企业社会责任实施。实验性企业社会责任实施意味着公司(1)产生有关特定企业社会责任背景下正在发生的事情的企业社会责任知识,并利用这些知识(2)调整企业社会责任实践以适应当地情况--这是一种抑制手段-目的脱钩的相互作用。以一致性为导向的企业社会责任实施缺乏这种知识生产与实践调整之间的相互作用,从而助长了手段-目的脱钩。我们关于以实验为导向的企业社会责任实施与以一致性为导向的企业社会责任实施的模型推动了两方面的研究。首先,我们通过强调实验对抑制手段-目的脱钩的重要性,推进了手段-目的脱钩的研究。其次,我们对企业社会责任实施的核心应是一致性这一普遍假设提出质疑,从而推动对企业社会责任活动影响的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
How Companies Restrain Means–Ends Decoupling: A Comparative Case Study of CSR Implementation

We use the concept of means–ends decoupling to examine why companies continue to be major contributors to environmental and social problems despite committing increasingly to corporate social responsibility (CSR). Specifically, we ask: How do companies restrain (versus fail to restrain) means–ends decoupling? We answer this question through a comparative case study of four multinational companies with different levels of means–ends decoupling. Based on interviews and secondary data, we inductively identify two distinct approaches to CSR implementation: experimental vs. consistency-oriented CSR implementation. Experimental CSR implementation means that companies (1) produce CSR knowledge about what is happening in specific CSR contexts and use this knowledge to (2) adapt CSR practices to local circumstances – an interplay that restrains means–ends decoupling. Consistency-oriented CSR implementation lacks this interplay between knowledge production and practice adaptation, which fosters means–ends decoupling. Our model of experimental versus consistency-oriented CSR implementation advances two streams of research. First, we advance research on means–ends decoupling by highlighting the importance of experimentation for restraining means–ends decoupling. Second, we advance research on the impact of CSR activities by questioning the widespread assumption that consistency should be at the heart of CSR implementation.

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
16.40
自引率
5.70%
发文量
99
期刊介绍: The Journal of Management Studies is a prestigious publication that specializes in multidisciplinary research in the field of business and management. With a rich history of excellence, we are dedicated to publishing innovative articles that contribute to the advancement of management and organization studies. Our journal welcomes empirical and conceptual contributions that are relevant to various areas including organization theory, organizational behavior, human resource management, strategy, international business, entrepreneurship, innovation, and critical management studies. We embrace diversity and are open to a wide range of methodological approaches and philosophical perspectives.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Issue Information List of People Who Reviewed for JMS in 2024 Issue Information Issue Information
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1