Reconsidering the ‘Symmetry’ Between Institutionalization and Professionalization: The Case of Corporate Social Responsibility Managers

The assumption of a mutually supportive, ‘symmetric’ relationship between institutionalization and professionalization is central to the institutionalist perspective on professional work. Our inductive qualitative study of corporate social responsibility (CSR) managers in multinational corporations (MNCs) prompts to rethink the validity of this assumption. We show that as the institutionalization of CSR advances and consolidates, CSR managers are pushed to the organizational periphery. This indicates that the relationship between professionalization and institutionalization can be ‘asymmetric’ under certain conditions. To advance the study of this asymmetry, we develop a conceptual framework and a set of corresponding propositions that explain why some groups are able to advance their professionalization projects, while others cannot. Our study makes three main contributions to the literature: First, we explicate under which conditions the relationship between institutionalization and professionalization is more likely asymmetric than symmetric. Second, our explanation of the shifting organizational positions of different professional groups allows for further delineating occupational from organizational professionals. Third, we contribute to the CSR literature by examining the dynamic yet ambiguous role of CSR managers as driving forces behind the implementation of CSR

Exploring the internal dynamics of corporate social responsibility implementation : the role of resource endowments and functional departments

The way corporate social responsibility (CSR) strategies unfold inside organizations remains a black box. This qualitative study delves into the inner workings of CSR. We inductively investigate the role of tangible and intangible resources and how resource flows are linked to various organizational departments involved in the execution of CSR. Our research question is: How are resources allocated for CSR distributed among organizational departments and why do these resources shift in the course of CSR implementation? We find six mechanisms explaining why resources are dynamically allocated to different departments and why such resource shifts trigger organizational transition towards more advanced levels of CSR implementation. Our research contributes to the literature that examines how CSR activities and strategies unfold within businesses. More generally, this allows better understanding of intra-organizational dynamics of firms’ strategic responses to normative pressures

Coordinated enactment: how organizational departments work together to implement CSR

Research on the implementation of corporate social responsibility (CSR) has revealed the critical role of CSR departments vis-a-vis functional departments. While both CSR and functional departments influence CSR implementation, the question of how they work together remains underexamined. We address this question by mobilizing and merging two complementary yet separate perspectives on CSR implementation: "coordination" and "enactment." Building on a comparative case study involving seven large Swiss financial institutions that have established CSR departments and implemented CSR to varying extents, we inductively derive six courses of actions conducing to CSR implementation, involving both coordination and enactment. We distinguish between four courses of actions in the CSR departments (centralizing, coalescing, orchestrating, and consulting) and two courses of actions in the functional departments (decentralizing and tailoring). As our data suggest that coordination and enactment work in tandem, we capture these insights in a model of CSR implementation as coordinated enactment. Our research contributes to the literature by explaining how CSR departments and functional departments enact and simultaneously coordinate CSR at a particular implementation stage, thus illuminating how and why the variance in CSR implementation occurs.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Institutional theory-based research on Corporate Social Responsibility: Bringing values back in

Research applying institutional theory to corporate social responsibility (CSR) has experienced remarkable momentum. Institutional theory-based CSR research illustrates the role of values in guiding both agentic choices for CSR and the influence of institutional structures on CSR agency. Although values have been explored in this literature, systematic studies of values that seek to gain insights into the mutual relationship between agentic choices and structures are lacking. Such insights are crucial for exploring whether and how CSR is enabled or constrained. We thus ask two interrelated questions: (1) What is the role of values in institutional theory-based CSR research? (2) How and along which avenues should future institutional theory-based CSR research that focuses on values be mobilised? Based on our analysis of this line of literature from 1989 until 2021, first, we take stock of established institutional theory perspectives on CSR and disentangle what role values have played in this literature. Second, we outline how to mobilise values in future institutional CSR research based on four promising but under-investigated areas. From our literature analysis, two central functions emerge (which we label ‘bridging’ and ‘referencing’) that values can perform in the institutional analysis of CSR. Based on these two functions, our values-focused framework will help scholars examine the moral foundations that inform business–society interactions as well as understand how companies can responsibly manage those interactions with societal stakeholders

Institutional theory-based research on corporate social responsibility: Bringing values back in

Research applying institutional theory to corporate social responsibility (CSR) has experienced remarkable momentum. Institutional theory-based CSR research illustrates the role of values in guiding both agentic choices for CSR and the influence of institutional structures on CSR agency. Although values have been explored in this literature, systematic studies of values that seek to gain insights into the mutual relationship between agentic choices and structures are lacking. Such insights are crucial for exploring whether and how CSR is enabled or constrained. We thus ask two interrelated questions: (1) What is the role of values in institutional theory-based CSR research? (2) How and along which avenues should future institutional theory-based CSR research that focuses on values be mobilised? Based on our analysis of this line of literature from 1989 until 2021, first, we take stock of established institutional theory perspectives on CSR and disentangle what role values have played in this literature. Second, we outline how to mobilise values in future institutional CSR research based on four promising but under-investigated areas. From our literature analysis, two central functions emerge (which we label ‘bridging’ and ‘referencing’) that values can perform in the institutional analysis of CSR. Based on these two functions, our values-focused framework will help scholars examine the moral foundations that inform business–society interactions as well as understand how companies can responsibly manage those interactions with societal stakeholders

Management Research that Makes a Difference:Broadening the Meaning of Impact

The world is undergoing dramatic transformations. Many of the grand societal challenges we currently face underscore the need for scholarly research – including management studies – that can help us best sort out and solve them. Yet, management scholars struggle to produce concrete solutions or to communicate how their research can help to tackle these grand societal challenges. With this editorial, we want to help scholars seeking to ‘make a difference’ by broadening our understanding of what constitutes impactful research. We examine five forms of impact – scholarly, practical, societal, policy, and educational – outlining how scholars can systematically extend or enlarge their research agenda or projects to amplify their impact on the challenges societies face. We suggest that each of these forms of impact has intrinsic value in advancing the scientific enterprise and, together, can help to address key societal problems that reach beyond the immediate and traditional context of business management. With concrete suggestions for getting started on these forms of impact, and possible outputs for each, we hope to stimulate management and organization scholars to think more broadly about the opportunities for making an impact with their research and to begin doing so more often

Von rhetorischer zu organisationaler Realität? Die globale Standardisierung von Unternehmensverantwortung als diskursiver Aushandlungsprozess

"In diesem Beitrag untersuchen die Autoren den Prozess der globalen Standardisierung von Maßnahmen der Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). Unter Rückgriff auf Theorieansätze des Neuen Soziologischen Institutionalismus unterscheiden sie hierbei zwischen der Breiten- und Tiefendimension von CSR-Standardisierungsprozessen. Am Beispiel des 'Equator Principles'- Standards in der internationalen Projektfinanzierungsindustrie zeigen sie auf, dass sich CSR-Standards innerhalb einer Industrie zwar rasch und weit verbreiten können (Breitendimension), dass jedoch erst diskursive Aushandlungsprozesse zwischen den beteiligten Akteuren mithin darüber bestimmen, ob und inwieweit die Außendarstellung mit der tatsächlichen Implementierung von Organisationspraktiken (Tiefendimension) in Einklang gebracht wird." (Autorenreferat)"In this paper, the authors examine the process of global corporate social responsibility (CSR) standardization. By drawing on neo-institutionalist theories they distinguish between the breadth and depth dimension of CSR standardization. Based on their empirical study of the 'Equator Principles', a CSR standard in the field of international project finance, they exemplify that CSR standards indeed can disseminate rapidly and widely within an industry (breadth dimension). However, they also show that their impact is contingent upon discursive negotiation processes that affect whether the formal adoption of a standard is perceived as meaningful and legitimate, in turn engendering the actual organizational implementation of practices (depth dimension)." (author's abstract

Here, There and Everywhere: On the Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Management Research and the Peer‐Review Process

AbstractThis editorial introduces and explains the Journal of Management Studies’ (JMS) new policy on artificial intelligence (AI). We reflect on the use of AI in conducting research and generating journal submissions and what this means for the wider JMS community, including our authors, reviewers, editors, and readers. Specifically, we consider how AI‐generated research and text could both assist and augment the publication process, as well as harm it. Consequentially, our policy acknowledges the need for careful oversight regarding the use of AI to assist in the authoring of texts and in data analyses, while also noting the importance of requiring authors to be transparent about how, when and where they have utilized AI in their submissions or underlying research. Additionally, we examine how and in what ways AI's use may be antithetical to the spirit of a quality journal like JMS that values both human voice and research transparency. Our editorial explains why we require author teams to oversee all aspects of AI use within their projects, and to take personal responsibility for accuracy in all aspects of their research. We also explain our prohibition of AI's use in peer‐reviewers’ evaluations of submissions, and regarding editors’ handling of manuscripts.</jats:p

First spaceborne observation of sea surface height using GPS-reflectometry

An analysis of spaceborne Global Positioning System reflectometry (GPS-R) data from the TechDemoSat-1 (TDS-1) satellite is carried out to image the ocean sea surface height (SSH). An SSH estimation algorithm is applied to GPS-R delay waveforms over two regions in the South Atlantic and the North Pacific. Estimates made from TDS-1 overpasses during a 6 month period are aggregated to produce SSH maps of the two regions. The maps generally agree with the global DTU10 mean sea surface height. The GPS-R instrument is designed to make bistatic measurements of radar cross section for ocean wind observations, and its altimetric performance is not optimized. The differences observed between measured and DTU10 SSH can be attributed to limitations with the GPS-R instrument and the lack of precision orbit determination by the TDS-1 platform. These results represent the first observations of SSH by a spaceborne GPS-R instrument