Authenticity, Power, and Pluralism: A Framework for Understanding Stakeholder Evaluations of Corporate Social Responsibility Activities

We explore the essential contestedness of corporate social responsibility (CSR) by framing the interplay between CSR activities and st akeholder evaluations as a contest for jurisdiction over what it means to be socially resp onsible. This contest arises because firms and stakeholders are often guided by incompatible sense making systems. To show why context matters we show how stakeholders evaluate the authe nticity of CSR activities on the basis of schemas for responsible behavior on one hand and th eir perceptions of firm identity on the other. This process can generate complex evaluations whose meaning depends on the distribution of power in fields and the extent to which pluralistic sensemaking systems are compatible. By positioning authenticity evaluations within a frame work that describes the state of power and pluralism within which they are produced, we are ab le to present a systematic explanation of how and why stakeholder responses to CSR vary over a range of settings

Institutional Complexity and the Authenticity of Corporate Social Responsibility Initiatives

Stakeholders frequently regard CSR initiatives as inauthentic gestures even when the corporation is trying to behave responsibly. In this study we develop theory about which initiatives are likely to be viewed as authentic or not by which observers, when and why. We draw on concepts of authenticity from marketing and prior work on CSR, and on theories of institutional pluralism and institutional complexity as the basis for our propositions. We propose that different institutional logics value different criteria for assessing authenticity, and develop a model to explain how level of agreement on these criteria comes about and leads to varying outcomes in terms of perceived authenticity

Advancing the Scholarship of Teaching Through Collaborative Self-Study

Self-study research is a mode of scholarly inquiry in which teachers examine their beliefs and actions as educators and explore pedagogical questions. A three-phase model of collaborative self-study research is offered as a framework for university faculty to engage in self-study for the purpose of improving teaching and creating new knowledge

From Interactions to Institutions: Microprocesses of Framing and Mechanisms for the Structuring of Institutional Fields

Despite the centrality of meaning to institutionalization, little attention has been paid to how meanings evolve and amplify to become institutionalized cultural conventions. We develop an interactional framing perspective to explain the microprocesses and mechanisms by which this occurs. We identify three amplification processes and three ways frames stack up or laminate that become the building blocks for diffusion and institutionalization of meanings within organizations and fields. Although we focus on “bottom-up” dynamics, we argue that framing occurs in a politicized social context and is inherently bidirectional, in line with structuration, because microlevel interactions instantiate macrostructures. We consider how our approach complements other theories of meaning making, its utility for informing related theoretical streams, and its implications for organizing at the meso and macro levels

A Framework for Assessing Power in Collaborative Governance Processes

The growing use of collaborative methods of governance raises concerns about the relative power of participants in such processes and the potential for exclusion or domination of some parties. This research offers a framework for assessing power that considers authority, resources, and discursive legitimacy as sources of power and considers the participants, the process design, and the content of collaborative governance processes as arenas for power use. A case study of a collaborative governance process is presented and analyzed using the power framework. Implications for the design of collaborative governance processes are discussed, including the benefits of a multidimensional definition of power, tools for managing power imbalances among participants, and strategies that participants can use to participate more fully in collaborative governance processes

Conflict in Cross-Sector Partnerships

Cross-sector partnerships are widely hailed as a critical means for addressing a wide array of social challenges such as climate change, poverty, education, corruption, and health. Amid all the positive rhetoric of cross-sector partnerships though, critical voices point to the limited success of various initiatives in delivering genuine social change and in providing for real citizen participation. This collection critically examines the motivations for, processes within, and expected and actual outcomes of cross-sector partnerships. In opening up new theoretical, methodological, and practical perspectives on cross-sector social interactions, this book reimagines partnerships in order to explore the potential to contribute to the social good. A multi-disciplinary perspective on partnerships adds serious value to the debate in a range of fields including management, politics, public management, sociology, development studies, and international relations. Contributors to the volume reflect many of these diverse perspectives, enabling the book to provide an account of partnerships that is theoretically rich and methodologically varied. With critical contributions from leading academics such as Barbara Gray, Ans Kolk, John Selsky, and Sandra Waddock, this book is a comprehensive resource which will increase understanding of this vital issue

The Role of Third Parties in County Dispute Resolution

County officials are increasingly responsible for resolving complex disputes that involve diverse parties, including elected officials, citizen groups, and business interests. Third-party dispute resolution processes offer a set of tools that can assist county managers in resolving disputes while increasing public involvement in government and building stronger relationships in the community. Numerous examples are presented illustrating a variety of dispute solution techniques in conflict situations. For third-party processes to be successful, participants must understand when to use third-party processes, how to select qualified neutrals, and how to get others committed to the process. Each of these topics is discussed in the context of county governance

The Impact of National Institutional Context on Social Practices: Comparing Finnish and US Business Communities

This paper investigates the impact of national institutional contexts on firms\u27 socially responsible practices, the motives for such practices and methods of organising social practices. Surveys of firms in a liberal market economy (USA) and those in a coordinated market economy (Finland) are compared. Findings indicate that social practices differ between the contexts, providing empirical support for the theory of explicit and implicit forms of corporate social responsibility. The paper offers insight into how social practices are organised in different contexts and a new conceptualisation of the motives for social responsibility. Results suggest that national institutional context should be accounted for in empirical studies of business social practices