Knowledge that Transforms

ABSTRACTMultinational enterprises (MNEs) operate in complex transnational organizational fields with multiple, diverse, and possibly conflicting institutional forces. This paper examines how such complex environments affect a firm's adoption of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) practices. To capture the effect of transnational fields, we consider the institutional influences of all country environments to which the firm is linked through its portfolio of operations and propose that these effects will be weighted depending on their relative salience. We identify a set of factors that make certain pressures more salient than others, including firm's economic dependence on a particular country, heterogeneity of institutional forces within the firm's transnational field, exposure to leading countries with more stringent CSR templates, and intensity and commitment to particular economic linkages (i.e., foreign direct investment versus international trade). Our hypotheses are tested and supported in a study of 710 US MNEs from 2007 to 2011 with global ties to over 100 countries.

AbstractDespite the increasing attention to corporate social responsibility (CSR) in the management literature, little is known about the mechanisms and boundary conditions explaining employees’ responses to CSR. Drawing on social identity and cue consistency theory, we develop a mediated moderation model that explains how and under which conditions perceived CSR affects employees’ organizational identification. We test the model by carrying out a three‐wave longitudinal study on employees of an international utility company. The findings indicate that perceived CSR interacts with overall justice to predict organizational identification through the successive mediation of perceived external prestige and organizational pride. The study clarifies and advances some of the theoretical foundations surrounding the micro‐level approach of CSR and has key implications for management research and practice.

ABSTRACTThis article takes stock of the discourse on ‘political CSR’ (PCSR), reconsiders some of its assumptions, and suggests new directions for what we call ‘PCSR 2.0’. We start with a definition of PCSR, focusing on firms’ contribution to public goods. We then discuss historical antecedents to the debate and outline the original economic and political context. The following section explores emerging changes in the institutional context relevant to PCSR and reconsiders some of the assumptions underlying Habermas’ thesis of the postnational constellation. This highlights some neglected issues in previous works on PCSR, including the influence of nationalism and fundamentalism, the role of various types of business organisations, the return of government regulation, the complexity of institutional contexts, the efficiency of private governance, the financialization and digitalization of the economy, and the relevance of managerial sensemaking. Finally, we discuss the contributions to this special issue and relate them to the newly emerging research agenda.

AbstractResearch generally suggests that, relative to commercial entrepreneurs, social entrepreneurs stand at a disadvantage at acquiring resources through traditional financial institutions. Yet interest in social entrepreneurship appears to be at an all‐time high. The current paper advances the argument that an innovative institutional form – crowdfunding – has emerged to address the needs of social entrepreneurs and other entrepreneurs with limited access to traditional sources of capital. To examine this, we study whether and how a sustainability orientation affects entrepreneurs’ ability to acquire financial resources through crowdfunding and hypothesize that a venture's sustainability orientation will enhance its fundraising capability. We also suggest that project legitimacy and creativity mediate the relationship between a sustainability orientation and funding success. Our analysis produces two key findings: 1) a sustainability orientation positively affects funding success of crowdfunding projects, and 2) this relationship is partially mediated by project creativity and third party endorsements.

ABSTRACTWhile scholars have explained how business has increasingly taken on regulatory roles to address social and environmental challenges, less attention has been given to the process of how business is made responsible for wicked problems. Drawing on a study of ‘conflict minerals’ in the Democratic Republic of Congo, we examine the process through which companies became responsible for a humanitarian crisis. We contribute by: (1) bridging insights from contentious performance and deliberative approaches – to present a model of corporate political responsibilization for a wicked problem that explains how a ‘field frame’ of responsibility can emerge; (2) explaining shifting boundaries between public and private responsibilities and the changing role of the state as catalytic rather than coercive; and (3) showing how responsibility can be attributed to a target by framing an issue and its root cause in ways that allow such an attribution, and how the attribution can diffuse and solidify.

ABSTRACTHow can corporations develop legitimacy when coping with stakeholders who have multiple, often conflicting sustainable development (SD) agendas? We address this question by conducting an in‐depth longitudinal case study of a corporation's stakeholder engagement in social media and propose the concept of a networked legitimacy strategy. With this strategy, legitimacy is gained through participation in non‐hierarchical open platforms and the co‐construction of agendas. We explore the organizational transition needed to yield this new legitimacy approach. We argue that, in this context, legitimacy gains may increase when firms are able to reduce the control over the engagements and relate non‐hierarchically with their publics. We contribute to the extant literature on political corporate social responsibility and legitimacy by providing an understanding of a new context for engagement that reconfigures cultural, network, and power relations between the firm and their stakeholders in ways that challenge previous forms of legitimation.

AbstractThis study examines how and why entrepreneurial passion for founding changes over time. In particular, we propose that in the founding phase of a venture's lifecycle entrepreneurs’ founding identity centrality will remain stable over time. We also propose, however, that in our sample and time period studied, entrepreneurs’ intense positive feelings for founding will decrease over time. On the basis of theories of positive illusion, self‐regulation and role theory, we further hypothesize that venture idea change, change in role ambiguity and entrepreneurs’ feedback‐seeking behaviour are factors that help explain the rate of change in entrepreneurs’ intense positive feelings for founding. Using a three‐wave longitudinal research design, we find that among a sample of 112 entrepreneurs’ identity centrality does not change over time, whereas intense positive feelings for founding decrease over time. Moreover, the more entrepreneurs change their venture ideas, the weaker their decrease in intense positive feelings. Further, we show that entrepreneurs who frequently seek feedback suffer less from reduced positive feelings in response to higher increases in role ambiguity as compared to entrepreneurs who seek less feedback.

AbstractFollowing the growing interest in sustainability and ethics, organizations are increasingly attentive to accountability toward stakeholders. Stakeholder representation, obtained by appointing board members representing different stakeholder groups, is suggested to be a good ethical practice. However, such representation may also have nefarious implications for board functioning. Particularly, it may result in strong faultline emergence, subsequently mitigating board performance. Our study aims at understanding the process through which faultlines affect board performance, and particularly the board service role through which the board is involved in providing counsel and strategic decision‐making. We study the relationship between faultlines and board service performance in the particularly relevant context of social enterprises. We find that faultline strength is negatively related to board service performance and that this relationship is mediated by board task conflict. Furthermore, our study reveals the importance of clear and shared organizational goals in attenuating the negative effects of faultlines.

ABSTRACTIn this article we pursue two objectives. First, we refine the concept of responsible leadership from an upper echelon perspective by exploring two distinct styles (instrumental and integrative) and thereby further developing the understanding of the newly emerging integrative style. Second, we propose a framework that examines the micro‐foundations of political corporate social responsibility (CSR). We explicate how the political CSR engagement of organizations (in social innovation and multi‐stakeholder initiatives) is influenced by responsible leadership styles and posit that most CEOs tend to espouse either instrumental or integrative responsible leadership approaches, based on perceived moral obligations toward shareholders or stakeholders. We examine the moderating effects of societal‐ and organizational‐level factors (such as power distance and corporate governance), and individual‐level influences (such as cognitive and social complexity). We discuss both approaches with respect to their effectiveness in dealing with political CSR challenges in a complex environment and conclude that an instrumental responsible leadership style may be effective in relatively stable settings with strong institutional arrangements, while the complex and unstable context of a post‐national constellation with weak institutions calls for an integrative responsible leadership style. The latter can be expected to be more effective in dealing with political CSR challenges in a global world, contributing to closing governance gaps and producing sustainable outcomes for societies.

ABSTRACTFor multinational corporations (MNEs), the ability to navigate institutional complexity is a key to success or failure. MNEs face a complex landscape of national institutional differences in the countries in which they do business, and decisions on how to respond to these differences are very much strategic ones, reflecting agency and management skill. To understand how institutional complexity affects MNE behaviour, it is necessary to examine how institutions vary on a national or societal level and how these affect firm structure and capabilities in both home and host countries.