Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (17)
- Part of a Book (6)
- Review (2)
- Contribution to a Periodical (1)
- Working Paper (1)
Language
- English (27)
Has Fulltext
- no (27)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (27)
Keywords
- - (1)
- collective memory (1)
- forgetting (1)
- historical organization studies (1)
- literature review (1)
- memory (1)
- mnemonics (1)
- organizational learning (1)
- remembering (1)
- rhetorical history (1)
Business and Human Rights
(2011)
Research on regulation and regulatory processes has traditionally focused on two prominent roles: rulemaking and rule‐taking. Recently, the mediating role of third party actors, regulatory intermediaries, has started to be explored – notably in a dedicated special issue of the ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. The present special issue extends this line of research by elaborating the distinction between formal and informal modes of regulatory intermediation, in the specific context of transnational multistakeholder regulation. In this introduction, we identify two key dimensions of intermediation (in)formalism: officialization and formalization. This allows us to develop a typology of intermediation in multistakeholder regulatory processes: formal, interpretive, alternative, and emergent. Leveraging examples from the papers in this special issue, we discuss how these four types of intermediation coexist and evolve over time. Finally, we elaborate on the implications of our typology for regulatory processes and outcomes.
Activists as moral entrepreneurs: How shareholder activists brought active ownership to Switzerland
(2019)
Action from activists is at the origin of many initiatives that end up injecting moral concerns into the way companies operate. In such instances, activists function as moral entrepreneurs that lastingly change the definition of what constitutes morally acceptable corporate behavior. Yet, in order to have such a lasting effect on companies, activist efforts need to pass through multiple stages that deal with both the effective mobilization of their own constituents and the triggering of corporate responses that can induce broader change in the economy. In the present chapter, the authors study how local shareholder activists initiated and helped sustain the process that led to the establishment of active ownership in Switzerland between 1997 and 2011. Active ownership refers to the active engagement of shareholders with firms to push them toward considering environmental, social, and corporate governance criteria in their decision-making. The case illustrates the processual nature of moralizing dynamics initiated by activists and emphasizes the long-term and cumulative nature of many moralization projects.
Activism for corporate responsibility: Conceptualizing private regulation opportunity structures
(2014)
In this article, we examine how private regulatory initiatives (PRIs) – which define standards for corporate responsibility (CR) issues and sometimes monitor their application by firms – create opportunities and constraints for activist groups aiming to push firms towards more stringent CR activities. Drawing on social movement theory, we conceptualize how private regulation opportunity structures affect such CR‐based activist groups' targets and tactics at both the firm and field levels. At the field level, we argue that both radical and reformative activist groups direct most of their time and resources towards PRIs with comparatively more stringent standards. At the firm level, while radical activist groups are likely to target firms participating in more stringent PRIs, reformative activist groups target firms participating in less stringent PRIs, or those that do not participate in PRIs at all. When facing unfavourable opportunity structures, CR‐based activist groups tend either to advocate the creation of new PRIs or to shift their activities to pressure other focal points. This article contributes to moving beyond extant literature's emphasis of PRIs as settlements of contentious firm–activist interactions towards also viewing them as starting points for activist groups aiming to push firms towards a more substantive CR engagement.
This study unpacks the construct of theorization – the process by which organizational ideas become delocalized and abstracted into theoretical models to support their diffusion across time and space. We adopt an institutional work lens to analyse the key components of theorization in contexts where institutional work is in transition from changing institutions to maintaining them. We build on a longitudinal inductive study of theorization by the Fair Labor Association – a private regulatory initiative that created and then enforced a code of conduct for working conditions in apparel factories. Our study reveals that when institutional work shifts from changing to maintaining an institutional arrangement of corporate social responsibility, there is a key change in how the Fair Labor Association theorizes roles and practices related to this arrangement. We observe that theorization on key practices largely remains intact, whereas the roles of different actors are theorized in a dramatically different manner. Our findings contribute to a better understanding of the work involved in the aftermath of radical change by demonstrating the relative plasticity of roles over the rigidity of practices.
Why are some serious cases of corporate irresponsibility collectively forgotten? Drawing on social memory studies, we examine how this collective forgetting process can occur. We propose that a major instance of corporate irresponsibility leads to the emergence of a stakeholder mnemonic community that shares a common recollection of the past incident. This community generates and then draws on mnemonic traces to sustain a collective memory of the past event over time. In addition to the natural entropic tendency to forget, collective memory is also undermined by instrumental “forgetting work,” which we conceptualize in this article. Forgetting work involves manipulating short-term conditions of the event, silencing vocal “rememberers,” and undermining collective mnemonic traces that sustain a version of the past. This process can result in a reconfigured collective memory and collective forgetting of corporate irresponsibility events. Collective forgetting can have positive and negative consequences for the firm, stakeholders, and society.
Research on prosocial organising has made great strides in understanding how organisations foster durable social change through core work directly targeting specific beneficiaries (e.g. work integration), and also through community work to obtain the cooperation of key stakeholders. Yet, extant research tends to focus on community work that is closely related – or proximal – to core work and is thus weakly equipped to explain how seemingly unrelated, distal community work unfolds. To address this puzzle, we study an Italian work integration social enterprise that engaged in anti-Mafia work to support its core work of reintegrating people with mental health issues. We unveiled the process whereby it came to engage in this distal community work, how this work facilitated the destigmatisation of the beneficiaries and, ultimately, their reintegration in the community. We contribute to the literature on prosocial organising by providing a more complex and nuanced view of the relationship between core and community work, as well as how to manage stigma.
Book review: Private governance: Creating order in economic and social life, by Edward P. Stringham
(2017)
Advancing the business & human rights agenda: Dialogue, empowerment and constructive engagement
(2010)
As corporations are going global, they are increasingly confronted with human rights challenges. As such, new ways to deal with human rights challenges in corporate operations must be developed as traditional governance mechanisms are not always able to tackle them. This article presents five different views on innovative solutions for the relationships between business and human rights that all build on empowerment, dialogue and constructive engagement. The different approaches highlight an emerging trend toward a more active role for corporations in the protection of human rights. The first examines the need for enhanced dialogue between corporations and their stakeholders. The next three each examine a different facet of empowerment, a critical factor for the respect and protection of human rights: empowerment of the poor, of communities, and of consumers. The final one presents a case study of constructive corporate engagement in Myanmar (Burma). Altogether, these research projects provide insight into the complex relationships between corporate operations and human rights, by highlighting the importance of stakeholder dialogue and empowerment. All the five projects were presented during the Second Swiss Master Class in Corporate Social Responsibility, held in Lausanne, Switzerland on December 12, 2008. The audience for this conference, which examined business and human rights, was composed of researchers, governmental representatives, and business and non-governmental organization practitioners.
This paper provides an overview and discussion of the rapidly growing literature on organizational memory studies (OMS). We define OMS as an inquiry into the ways that remembering and forgetting shape, and are shaped by, organizations and organizing processes. The contribution of this article is threefold. We briefly review what we understand by organizational memory and explore some key debates and points of contestation in the field. Second, we identify four different perspectives that have been developed in OMS (functional, interpretive, critical and performative) and expand upon each perspective by showcasing articles published over the past decade. In particular, we examine four papers previously published in Organization Studies to show the distinctiveness of each perspective. Finally, we identify a number of areas for future research to facilitate the future development of OMS.
Although the growth of the field of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) calls for more diverse exercises of reviewing, most reviews of CSR research present the organising categories on which they build as taken-for-granted. In so doing, they reify a structural-functionalist orientation and a linear view of time while failing to represent accurately alternative post-structural and anti-structural CSR paradigms. Building on an analysis of 40 reviews of the CSR field and on insights from the social studies of science, this paper revisits the notion of field re-presentation and highlights the need for building on categories, which embed a richer set of ontological assumptions to represent the CSR field in a manner that could maintain a dose of ontological and epistemological pluralism and diversity. We finally discuss the implications of our analysis to enhance CSR theory-building, cross-fertilize insights from distinct CSR paradigms and develop alternative assumptions to investigate empirically CSR phenomena.
In a globalizing world, governments are not always able or willing to regulate the social and environmental externalities of global business activities. Multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSI), defined as global institutions involving mainly corporations and civil society organizations, are one type of regulatory mechanism that tries to fill this gap by issuing soft law regulation. This conceptual paper examines the conditions of a legitimate transfer of regulatory power from traditional democratic nation-state processes to private regulatory schemes, such as MSIs. Democratic legitimacy is typically concerned with input legitimacy (rule credibility, or the extent to which the regulations are perceived as justified) and output legitimacy (rule effectiveness, or the extent to which the rules effectively solve the issues). In this study, we identify MSI input legitimacy criteria (inclusion, procedural fairness, consensual orientation, and transparency) and those of MSI output legitimacy (rule coverage, efficacy, and enforcement), and discuss their implications for MSI democratic legitimacy.
The diffusion of contested practices across environments: Social movements’ boundary-bridging role
(2013)
We examine the diffusion across country institutional environments of a corporate practice that is contested by potential adopters. We show that the diffusion process is in crucial ways driven by the mobilization of social movement activists in favour of the corporate practice in the target institutional environment. We further show that social movement activism is particularly relevant for the pioneering introduction of a foreign practice into a new institutional environment in the early stages of the diffusion process, while more conventional institutional pressures become relevant at later stages of the process. Results from the study of the adoption of the corporate governance practice ‘say on pay’ by Swiss companies between 2007 and 2012 largely support our hypotheses and underline the boundary-bridging role of transnationally connected social movement activists.
Tobacco companies have jumped on the Corporate social responsibility (CSR) bandwagon as a tentative to be societally accepted as responsible actors and good corporate citizens. This is however not possible for two reasons. First, the product they sell is lethal and thus not compatible with the precondition of doing no harm to be a good corporate citizen. Second, the behavior of tobacco firms is not responsible, being illustrated by four examples: junk science versus sound science strategy, seducing young smokers, political lobbying and getting customers on new markets. To conclude, three implications for regulating the activities of the tobacco industry are given.
The purpose of this working paper is to conduct a comprehensive review of existing literature that explores the relationship between business organizations and democracy. This review draws from various fields, including management, business ethics, sociology, international law, and other relevant disciplines for this Project and has several objectives. Firstly, it aims to provide insight into prior research on how democratic institutions regulate economic actors and how these actors, particularly large multinational corporations (MNCs), resist such regulation. Additionally, it examines how these economic actors develop behaviors and economic models that pose challenges to democratic governance, such as business-related human rights violations. In the initial part of the review, we delve into the historical and contemporary aspects of the relationship between business and democracy. Furthermore, the report explores how companies can contribute to shaping a more democratic future by addressing gaps in governance, especially in cases where populist governments fail to protect the rights of their citizens. It also considers the development of alternative business models, such as social enterprises and cross-sector partnerships. Moreover, it looks into how businesses can actively engage in democratic governance and promote principles of participation. The final section of the working paper involves a bibliometric analysis, including co authorship, co-citation, and keyword co-occurrence maps. This analysis is based on key references used by team members in their literature reviews and is designed to examine the connections that exist among various strands of research that support the research questions of the Rebalance Project.
Multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSIs)—private governance mechanisms involving firms, civil society organizations, and other actors deliberating to set rules, such as standards or codes of conduct, with which firms comply voluntarily—have become important tools for governing global business activities and the social and environmental consequences of these activities. Yet, this growth is paralleled with concerns about MSIs’ deliberative capacity, including the limited inclusion of some marginalized stakeholders, bias toward corporate interests, and, ultimately, ineffectiveness in their role as regulators. In this article, we conceptualize MSIs as deliberative systems to open the black box of the different elements that make up the MSI polity and better understand how their deliberative capacity hinges on problems in different elements. On the basis of this conceptualization, we examine how deliberative mini-publics—forums in which a randomly selected group of individuals from a particular population engage in learning and facilitated deliberations about a topic—can improve the deliberative capacity of MSIs.
In this paper, we review and synthesize the growing sociology-informed literature on organizational memory studies, which focuses on collective memory as a social construction of the past. To organize this literature, we present an ecological view of collective memory. Organizations, from this perspective, are conceived of as both constituted by a variety of mnemonic communities and, simultaneously, part of a broader ecology of mnemonic communities. We use this framework to guide our review of the various forms of memory work within and between mnemonic communities. Our review shows that much of the sociologically informed research has focused on memory work within communities. We also identify an emerging interest in the study of memory work between communities. In conclusion, we discuss possible future directions and outline a three-point agenda for future research that calls for a better understanding of the relational dynamics of memory with a focus on the organizing of memory, the embeddedness of memory work, and the construction of experiences of the past.
From explanation to outcome: The use of institutional theory in corporate responsibility research
(2021)
Although numerous books and articles provide toolkit approaches to explain how to conduct literature reviews, these prescriptions regard literature reviewing as the production of representations of academic fields. Such representationalism is rarely questioned. Building on insights from social studies of science, we conceptualize literature reviewing as a performative endeavor that co-constitutes the literature it is supposed to “neutrally” describe, through a dual movement of re-presenting—constructing an account different from the literature, and intervening—adding to and potentially shaping this literature. We discuss four problems inherent to this movement of performativity—description, explicitness, provocation, and simulacrum—and then explore them through a systematic review of 48 reviews of the literature on corporate social responsibility (CSR) for the period 1975 to 2019. We provide evidence for the performative role of literature reviewing in the CSR field through both re-presenting and intervening. We find that reviews performed the CSR literature and, accordingly, the field’s boundaries, categories, and priorities in a self-sustaining manner. By reflexively subjecting our own systematic review to the four performative problems we discuss, we also derive implications of performative analysis for the practice of literature reviewing.
Research on corporate sustainability has started to acknowledge the role of temporality in creating more sustainable organizations. Yet, these advances tend to treat firms as monolithic and we have little understanding of how different temporal patterns throughout an organization shape perceptions of and actions toward sustainability. Building on studies highlighting how the temporal structures of work shape employee engagement with different organizational processes and issues, we seek to answer: How does the temporality of work practices structure perceptions of corporate sustainability throughout the firm? Using data from an ethnography of a small European sustainable bank, we provide an account of the variety of ways in which employees in different departments perceive the bank and how they engage with sustainability. We then go on to show how the temporal structures of work practices within different departments help explain some divergence in perceptions of sustainability. Our study highlights the variegation of temporal structures in organizational processes of meaning-making and its role for a better understanding of the efforts to make corporations more sustainable.