Contrary to the popular conception in the corporate environmental management literature that corporations must learn new ecocentric paradigms before they can be expected to produce environmentally sound performance, the present results suggest that cognitive–level environmental learning in organizations does not inevitably precede behaviour change. Rather, at least partially, such learning is likely to occur in the course of action. The article also proposes that external pressure can set motion, but it alone does not lead to an environmental paradigm shift. In order to undergo such a shift, organizations will have to learn a meaning of their own to support new, more environmentally sound forms of activity.The present study examines empirically how two companies have learnt to incorporate environmental considerations into their managerial paradigms. It adopts a perspective according to which learning is portrayed as a process in which changes are brought about in the collective beliefs that the organization members hold about the relationship of their business to the natural environment (i.e. environmental management paradigm). Applying the grounded theory approach, the article identifies phases of environmental learning starting from the recognition or rejection of weak signals in ‘pockets’ of the organization, continuing through the gaining of new knowledge and experience towards ‘competition’ between old and new assumptions about the business–environment relationship, and finally proceeding to potential frame–break.

AbstractNatural resource scarcity is giving rise to new forms of resource governance and so enhancing the transition to more sustainable resource use. One key development is the growth of circular economy systems, where residual resources are reused in closed‐loop systems. This requires an understanding of how diverse actors collectively govern the sustainable use and sharing of privately owned residual and waste resources. Our empirical analysis of three circular economy systems in Finland, the United States and Spain shows how a polycentric form of governance develops through collective action between businesses, the public sector, and societal actors based on multiple units of cooperation. Adopting insights from the polycentric governance of commons, we develop a theory of polycentric governance for privately owned residual resources. Our findings show that polycentric governance involves three main interacting elements: mutual adjustment between actors, practices for collective agency, and structures for sharing resources. As well as contributing to the understanding of collective action for sustainability, these findings also advance the interorganizational governance literature.

abstractIt is often argued that multinational corporations (MNCs) are in a unique position to innovate business models that can help to alleviate poverty. This empirical study into intra‐organizational aspects of pro‐poor business innovation in two MNCs suggests, however, that certain elements of their management frameworks – such as short‐term profit interests, business unit based incentive structures, and uncertainty avoidance – may turn into obstacles that prevent MNCs from reaching their full potential in this respect. We introduce the concept of intrapreneurial bricolage to show how middle manager innovators may promote pro‐poor business models despite these obstacles. We define intrapreneurial bricolage as entrepreneurial activity within a large organization characterized by creative bundling of scarce resources, and illustrate empirically how it helps innovators to overcome organizational constraints and to mobilize internal and external resources. Our findings imply that intrapreneurial bricolage may be of fundamental importance in MNC innovation for inclusive business. In addition to the field of inclusive business, this study has implications for the study of bricolage in large organizations and social intrapreneurship, as well for managerial practice around innovation for inclusive business.