Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Leaders and Laggards: The Influence of Competing Logics on Corporate Environmental Action

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We study the sources of resistance to change among firms in the Canadian petroleum industry in response to a shift in societal level logics related to corporate environmental performance. Despite challenges to its legitimacy as a result of poor environmental performance, the Canadian petroleum industry was divided as to how to respond, with some members ignoring the concerns and resisting change (i.e., laggards) while others took action to ensure continued legitimacy (i.e., leaders). We examine why organizations within the same institutional field responded differently, delaying the industry response. We found that one population of firms was aligned with increasing pressures from its stakeholders for improved environmental performance, and the other was influenced by local cultural, political, and economic ideals less demanding of environmental actions. Our results reveal that several factors both at the institutional field level and the organizational level affected how these two populations reacted to a changing societal logic. Implications for theory, practice, and future research are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  • Aerts, W., Cormier, D., & Magnan, M. (2006). Intra-industry Imitation in Corporate Environmental Reporting: An International Perspective. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 25, 299–331. doi:10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2006.03.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (EUB): 1999, Guide 62: Responding to Public Concerns About Oil and Gas in Alberta (Alberta Energy and Utilities Board, Calgary, AB)

  • Alford, R. R., & Friedland, R. (1985). Powers of Theory: Capitalism, the State and Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Angus Reid Group. (1994). Canadians and the environment. (Angus Reid Group, Inc., Ottawa)

    Google Scholar 

  • Bansal, P. (2001). ‹Sustainable Development’. Ivey Business Journal, 66, 47–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bansal, P. (2005). ‹Evolving Sustainability: A Longitudinal Study of Corporate Sustainable Development’. Strategic Management Journal, 26, 197–219. doi:10.1002/smj.441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, M. L. (2006a). ‹Finding a Working Balance Between Competitive and Communal Strategies’. Journal of Management Studies, 43, 1753–1773. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00661.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, M. L. (2006b). ‹Waves of Collectivizing: A Dynamic Model of Competition and Cooperation over the Life of an Industry’. Corporate Reputation Review, 8, 272–292. doi:10.1057/palgrave.crr.1540255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Battilana, J. (2006). ‹Agency and Institutions: The Enabling Role of Individual’s Social Position’. Organization, 13, 653–676. doi:10.1177/1350508406067008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bewley, K., & Li, Y. (2000). ‹Disclosure of Environmental Information by Canadian Manufacturing Companies: A Voluntary Disclosure Perspective’. Advances in Environmental Accounting & Management, 1, 201–226. doi:10.1016/S1479-3598(00)01011-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, F.: 2000, `Environmental Visibility: A Trigger of Green Organizational Response?', Business Strategy and the Environment 9, 92–107. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0836(200003/04)9:2<92::AID-BSE230>3.0.CO; 2-X.

  • Campbell, D., Craven, B., & Shrives, P. (2003). Voluntary social reporting in three FTSE sectors: a comment on perceptions of legitimacy. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 16, 558–581. doi:10.1108/09513570310492308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1979). A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497–505. doi:10.2307/257850.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1989). Business & Society: Ethics and Stakeholder Management. Cincinnati: South-Western Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christmann, P. (2004). ‹Multinational Companies and the Natural Environment: Determinants of Global Environmental Policy Standardization’. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 747–760.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clegg, S. R. (1999). Globalizing the Intelligent Organization. Management Learning, 30, 259–280. doi:10.1177/1350507699303001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cormier, D., Gordon, I. M., & Magnan, M. (2004). ‹Corporate Environmental Disclosure: Contrasting Management’s Perceptions with Reality’. Journal of Business Ethics, 49(2), 143–165. doi:10.1023/B:BUSI.0000015844.86206.b9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deegan, C. (2002). The Legitimating Effect of Social and Environmental Disclosures – A Theoretical Foundation. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15, 281–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deephouse, D. L. (1996). Does Isomorphism Legitimate? Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1024–1039. doi:10.2307/256722.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deephouse, D. L., & Carter, S. M. (2005). ‹An Examination of Differences between Organizational Legitimacy and Reputation’. Journal of Management Studies, 42, 329–360. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2005.00499.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillard, J. F., Rigsby, J. T., & Goodman, C. (2004). The Making and Remaking of Organization Context. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 17(4), 506–542. doi:10.1108/09513570410554542.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W· W. (1983). ‹The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields’. American Sociological Review, 48, 147-160. doi:10.2307/2095101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W· W. (1991). ‹Introduction’. In P. J. DiMaggio and W. W. Powell (Ed.), The New Institutionalism Organizational Analysis (pp. 1–38). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doh, J. P., & Guay, T. R. (2006). ‹Corporate social responsibility, public policy, and NGO activism in Europe and the United States: An institutional-stakeholder perspective’. Journal of Management Studies, 43, 47–73. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00582.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). ‹Building Theories from Case Study Research’. Academy of Management Review, 14, 532–550. doi:10.2307/258557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, E. R. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Boston: Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedland, R., & Alford, R. R. (1991) ‹Bringing Society Back in: Symbols, Practices and Institutional Contradictions’. In W. W. Powell and P. J. DiMaggio (Ed.), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. (pp. 232–263). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frooman, J. (1999). ‹Stakeholder Influence Strategies’. Academy of Management Review, 24, 191–205. doi:10.2307/259074.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herremans, I. M., Akathaporn, P., & McInnes, M. (1993). ‹An Investigation of Corporate Social Responsibility Reputation and Economic Performance’. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 18, 587–604. doi:10.1016/0361-3682(93)90044-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch, P. M. (1997). ‹Sociology without Social Structure: Neoinstitutional Theory Meets Brave New World’. American Journal of Sociology, 102, 1702–1723. doi:10.1086/231132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch, P.M., & Lounsbury, M. (1997). ‹Ending the Family Quarrel: Toward a Reconciliation of “Old” and “New” Institutionalism’. The American Behavioral Scientist, 40, 406–418. doi:10.1177/0002764297040004004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, A. J. (1999). ‹Institutional Evolution and Change: Environmentalism and the U.S Chemical Industry’. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 351–371. doi:10.2307/257008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, A.J. (2001a). From Heresy to Dogma: An Institutional History of Corporate Environmentalism (Expanded Edition). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, A. J. (2001b). ‹Linking Organizational and Field-Level Analyses: The Diffusion of Corporate Environmental Practice’. Organization & Environment, 14, 133–156. doi:10.1177/1086026601142001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, A. J., & Ventresca, M. J. (2002). Organizations, Policy and the Natural Environment: Institutional and Strategic Perspectives. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooghiemstra, R. (2000). Corporate Communication and Impression Management—New Perspectives Why Companies Engage in Corporate Social Reporting. Journal of Business Ethics, 27, 55–68. doi:10.1023/A:1006400707757.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, T., & Bansal, P. (2006). How Standard is Standardized MNC Global Environmental Communication? Journal of Business Ethics, 71, 135–147. doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9130-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, T. M., Felps, W., & Bigley, G. A. (2007). ‹Ethical Theory and Stakeholders-Related Decisions: The Role of Stakeholder Culture’. Academy of Management Review, 32, 137–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, A., & Lenox, M. (2000). ‹Industry Self-Regulation Without Sanctions: The Chemical Industry’s Responsible Care Program’. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 698–716. doi:10.2307/1556362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, A., Lenox, M., & Barnett, M. L. (2002). ‹Strategic Responses to the Reputations Commons Problem’. In A. J. Hoffman and M. J. Ventresca (Ed.). Organizations Policy, and The Natural Environment: Institutional and Strategic Perspectives. (pp. 393–406). Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamertz, K., Heugens, P· P. M. A .R., & Calmet, L. (2005). ‹The Configuration of Organizational Images Among Firms in the Canadian Beer Brewing Industry’. Journal of Management Studies, 42, 817–843. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2005.00520.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lounsbury, M. (2007). ‹A tale of two cities: Competing Logics and Practice Variation in the Professionalizing of Mutual Funds’. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 289-307.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. (2003). ‹Misery Loves Companies: Rethinking Social Initiatives by Business’. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 268–305. doi:10.2307/3556659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marquis, C., Glynn, M.A., & Davis, G.F. (2007). ‹Community Isomorphism and Corporate Social Action’. Academy of Management Review, 32, 925–945.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marquis, C., & Lounsbury, M. (2007). ‹Vive la Résistance: Competing Logics and the Consolidation of U.S. Community Banking’. Academy of Management Journal, 50(4), 799–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinez, R. J. (1999). ‹Efficiency Motives and Normative Forces: Combining Transaction Costs and Institutional Logic’. Journal of Management, 26, 27–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mattingly, J. E., & Hall, H. T. (2008). ‹Who Gets to Decide? The Role of Institutional Logics in Shaping Stakeholder Politics and Insurgency’. Business and Society Review, 113(1), 63–89. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8594.2008.00313.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J.W., & Rowan, B. (1977). ‹Institutional Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony’. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340–363. doi:10.1086/226550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, C. (1991). ‹Strategic Responses to Institutional Processes’. Academy of Management Review, 16, 145–179. doi:10.2307/258610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patten, D. M. (1992). ‹Intra-industry environmental disclosures in response to the Alaskan oil spill: A note on legitimacy theory’. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17, 471–475. doi:10.1016/0361-3682(92)90042-Q.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Payne, D. M., & Raiborn, C. A. (2001). Sustainable Development: The Ethics Support the Economics. Journal of Business Ethics, 32, 157–168. doi:10.1023/A:1010726830191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrick, J. A., Scherer, R. F., Brodzinski, J. D., Quinn, J. F., & Ainina, M. (1999). Global Leadership Skills and Reputational Capital: Intangible Resources for Sustainable Competitive Advantage. Academy of Management Executive, 13, 58–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petroleum Communications Foundation (PCF): 2000, Study of Canadians’ Attitudes and Awareness of Oil and Gas Sector Issues (Earnscliffe Research and Communications)

  • Pfeffer, J. & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, R. (2003). ‹Stakeholder legitimacy’. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13, 25–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Responsible Care-In-Place® Verification: 1997, Canadian Chemical Producers’ Association.

  • Responsible Care® Re-Verification: 2001, Canadian Chemical Producers’ Association.

  • Scandura, T. A. & Williams, E. A. (2000). ‹Research Methodology in Management: Current Practices, Trends, and Implications for Future Research’. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 1248–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, B. (2001) ‹Responsible Care’. Chemical Week. 163, 28–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R. (1991). ‹Unpacking Institutional Arrangements’. In W. W. Powell and P. J. DiMaggio (Ed.) The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. (pp. 164–82), Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and Organizations. 1st ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott W. R.: 2001, Institutions and Organizations, 2nd Edition (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA).

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R. & Davis, G. F. (2007). Organizations and Organizing: Rational, Natural and Open System Perspectives. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seo, M. G. & Creed, W. E. D. (2002). ‹Institutional Contradictions, Praxis, and Institutional Change: A Dialectic Perspective. Academy of Management Review. 27, 222–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sethi, S. P. (1979). ‹A Conceptual Framework for Environmental Analysis of Social Issues and Evaluation of Business Response Patterns.’ Academy of Management Review. 4, 63–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, M. C. (1995). ‹Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches’. Academy of Management Review, 20, 571–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suddaby, R. & Greenwood, R. (2005). ‹Rhetorical Strategies of Legitimacy’. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50, 35–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Environmental Monitor: 1996, Canadians and the Environment. Presentation to the Government of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta (International Environmental Monitor Limited, Toronto)

  • Thornton, P. H. (2002). ‹The Rise of the Corporation in a Craft Industry: Conflict and Conformity in Institutional Logics’. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 81–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornton, P. H. & Ocasio, W. (1999). ‹Institutional Logics and the Historical Contingency of Power in Organizations: Executive Succession in the Higher Education Publishing Industry’. American Journal of Sociology, 105, 805–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornton, P. H. and W. Ocasio: 2008, ‹Institutional Logics’, in R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, K. Sahlin and R. Suddaby (eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism (Sage, London), pp. 99–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (1976). ‹Educational Organizations as Loosely Coupled Systems’. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (1998). ‹The Abridged Version of Case Study Research’. In L Bickman and D. J. Rog (Ed.), Handbook of Applied Social Research Methods (pp. 229–59). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2003). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Nick Turner and Tom Lawrence for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this manuscript. The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support of Environment Canada and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. An earlier draft of this manuscript was presented at the 65th annual Academy of Management conference. All authors contributed equally to this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Haskayne School of Business, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

    Irene M. Herremans

  2. I. A. Asper School of Business, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada

    M. Sandy Herschovis

  3. Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, BC, Canada

    Stephanie Bertels

Authors
  1. Irene M. Herremans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Sandy Herschovis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stephanie Bertels
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Irene M. Herremans.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Herremans, I.M., Herschovis, M.S. & Bertels, S. Leaders and Laggards: The Influence of Competing Logics on Corporate Environmental Action. J Bus Ethics 89, 449–472 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-0010-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-0010-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation