Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 127, Issue 3, pp 591–605 | Cite as

Establishing How Natural Environmental Competency, Organizational Social Consciousness, and Innovativeness Relate

  • Clay DibrellEmail author
  • Justin B. Craig
  • Jaemin Kim
  • Aaron J. Johnson


This article investigates the moderating effects of organizational social consciousness on the natural environmental competency and innovativeness relationship. Organizational social consciousness reflects the organization’s awareness of its place and contribution to the larger system in which it exists and is developed through an organization’s social responsibility, ethics, culture, corporate values, and the view of its stakeholders. Through our study of key strategic decision makers from organizations located in the USA, we operationalize organizational social consciousness and demonstrate the efficacy of this construct in relation to the organizational-level constructs of environmental management competency and innovativeness. Our results reveal that organizational social consciousness positively strengthens the natural environmental competency to organizational innovativeness relationship.


Natural environmental competency Social consciousness Organizational innovativeness 


  1. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression, testing and interpreting interactions. New York: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Alkon, A. H. (2013). The socio-nature of local organic food. Antipode, 45(3), 663–680.Google Scholar
  3. Appelbaum, S. H., Iaconi, G. D., & Matousek, A. (2007). Positive and negative deviant workplace behaviors: causes, impacts, and solutions. Corporate Governance, 7(5), 586–598.Google Scholar
  4. Aragon-Correa, J. A., Hurtado-Torres, N., Sharma, N. S., & Garcia-Morales, V. J. (2008). Environmental strategy and performance in small firms: a resource-based perspective. Journal of Environmental Management, 86(1), 88–103.Google Scholar
  5. Aragon-Correa, J. A., & Sharma, S. (2003). A contingent resource-based view of proactive corporate environmental strategy. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 71–88.Google Scholar
  6. Austin, J., Stevenson, H., & Wei-Skillern, J. (2006). Social and commercial entrepreneurship: same, different, or both?’. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(1), 1–22.Google Scholar
  7. Bansal, P. (2005). Evolving sustainably: a longitudinal study of corporate sustainable development. Strategic Management Journal, 26(3), 197–218.Google Scholar
  8. Barnett, M., & King, A. (2008). Good fences make good neighbors: an institutional explanation of the benefits of industry self-regulation. Academy of Management Journal, 51(6), 1150–1170.Google Scholar
  9. Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage’. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.Google Scholar
  10. Berchicci, L., & King, A. (2007). Postcards from the edge. The Academy of Management Annals, 1(1), 513–547.Google Scholar
  11. Berry, M. A., & Rondinelli, D. A. (1998). Proactive corporate environmental management: a new industrial evolution. Academy of Management Executive, 12(2), 38–50.Google Scholar
  12. Black, J. A., & Boal, K. B. (1994). Strategic resources: traits, configurations and paths to sustainable competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 15(summer special issue), 131–148.Google Scholar
  13. Bohn, D. (1996). On dialogue. In L. Nichol (Ed.), The change handbook: Group methods for shaping the future. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Brunnermeier, S. B., & Cohen, M. A. (2003). Determinants of environmental innovation in US manufacturing industries. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 45, 278–293.Google Scholar
  15. Cameron, K. (2011). Responsible leadership as virtuous leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 98, 25–35.Google Scholar
  16. Cameron, K., Bright, D., & Caza, A. (2004). Exploring the relationships between organizational virtuousness and performance. American Behavioral Scientist, 47, 766–790.Google Scholar
  17. Campion, M. A., & Palmer, D. K. (1996). Discovering corporate consciousness. Journal of Business and Psychology, 10(4), 389–400.Google Scholar
  18. Capitanio, F., Coppola, A., & Pascucci, S. (2010). Product and process innovation in the Italian food industry. Agribusiness, 26(4), 503–518.Google Scholar
  19. Chen, Y. (2008). The driver of green innovation and green image—Green core competence. Journal of Business Ethics, 83, 531–543.Google Scholar
  20. Christmann, P. (2000). Effects of “best practices” of environmental management on cost competitiveness: the role of complementary assets. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 663–680.Google Scholar
  21. Coff, R. W. (1999). When competitive advantage doesn’t lead to performance: the resource-based view and stakeholder bargaining power. Organization Science, 10(2), 119–133.Google Scholar
  22. Craig, J. B., & Dibrell, C. (2006). The natural environment, innovation, and firm performance: a comparative study. Family Business Review, 19(4), 275–288.Google Scholar
  23. Dangelico, R. M., Pontrandolfo, P., & Pujari, D. (2013). Developing sustainable new products in the textile and upholstered furniture industries: role of external integrative capabilities. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(4), 642–658.Google Scholar
  24. Davis, P. S., Allen, J. A., & Dibrell, C. (2012). Fostering strategic awareness at an organization’s boundary. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 33(4), 322–341.Google Scholar
  25. Davis, J. H., Schoorman, F. D., & Donaldson, L. (1997). Toward a stewardship theory of management. Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 20–47.Google Scholar
  26. de Lange, D., Busch, T., & Delgado-Ceballos, J. (2012). Sustaining sustainability in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 110(2), 151–156.Google Scholar
  27. DeVellis, R. F. (1991). Scale development: Theory and applications. Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  28. Dibrell, C., Craig, J., & Hansen, E. (2011a). How managerial attitudes toward the natural environment affect market orientation and innovation. Journal of Business Research, 64(4), 401–407.Google Scholar
  29. Dibrell, C., Craig, J., & Hansen, E. (2011b). The impact of managerial attitudes toward the natural environment in growing versus mature firms. Journal of Small Business Management, 49(3), 467–489.Google Scholar
  30. Dillman, D. (2009). Internet, mail and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  31. Driscoll, C., & Starik, M. (2004). The primordial stakeholder: advancing the conceptual consideration of stakeholder status for the natural environment. Journal of Business Ethics, 49, 55–73.Google Scholar
  32. Duh, M., Belak, J., & Milfener, B. (2010). Core values, culture and ethical climate as constitutional elements of ethical behaviour: exploring differences between family and non-family enterprises. Journal of Business Ethics, 97, 473–489.Google Scholar
  33. Etzion, D. (2007). Research on organizations and the natural environment, 1992-present: a review. Journal of Management, 33(4), 637–664.Google Scholar
  34. Fassin, Y. (2008). Imperfections and shortcomings of the stakeholder model’s graphical representation. Journal of Business Ethics, 80, 879–888.Google Scholar
  35. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.Google Scholar
  36. Fredrickson, B. L. (1998). What good are positive emotions? Review of General Psychology, 2, 300–319.Google Scholar
  37. Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: the broaden-and- build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56, 218–226.Google Scholar
  38. George, J. M. (1991). State or trait: effects of positive mood on prosocial behaviors at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 229–307.Google Scholar
  39. Gerbing, D. W., & Anderson, J. C. (1988). An updated paradigm for scale development incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment. Journal of Marketing Research, 25(2), 186–192.Google Scholar
  40. Ghoshal, S., Piramal, G., & Bartlett, C. A. (2000). Managing radical change: What Indian companies must do to become world-class. New Delhi: Viking.Google Scholar
  41. Gibson, K. (2012). Stakeholders and sustainability: an evolving theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 109, 15–25.Google Scholar
  42. Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Hoskisson, R. E., Makri, M., Sirmon, D. G., & Campbell, J. T. (2011). Innovation and the preservation of socioemotional wealth: The paradox of R&D investment in family controlled high technology firms. (Unpublished manuscript). Mays Business School, Texas A&M University.Google Scholar
  43. Gottscalg, O., & Zollo, M. (2007). Interest alignment and competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 418–437.Google Scholar
  44. Haidt, J. (2000). The positive emotion of elevation. Prevention and Treatment, 3, 2.Google Scholar
  45. Hall, J., Daneke, G. A., & Lenox, M. J. (2010). Sustainable development and entrepreneurship: past contributions and future directions. Journal of Business Venturing, 25, 439–448.Google Scholar
  46. Harman, H. H. (1967). Modern factor analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  47. Hart, S. L. (1995). A natural resource based view of the firm. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 986–1014.Google Scholar
  48. Hart, S. L., & Ahuja, G. (1996). Does it pay to be green? An empirical examination of the relationship between pollution prevention and firm performance. Business Strategy and the Environment, 5, 30–37.Google Scholar
  49. Harvey, B., & Schaefer, A. (2001). Managing relationships with environmental stakeholders: a study of U.K. water and electricity utilities. Journal of Business Ethics, 30(3), 243–260.Google Scholar
  50. Hoffman, A. J. (2005). Climate change strategy: the business logic behind voluntary greenhouse gas reductions. California Management Review, 47(3), 21–46.Google Scholar
  51. Hult, G. T. M., Hurley, R. F., & Knight, G. A. (2004). Innovativeness: its antecedents and impact on business performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 33(5), 429–438.Google Scholar
  52. Hurley, R. F., & Hult, G. T. (1998). Innovation, market orientation, and organizational learning: an integration and empirical examination. Journal of Marketing, 62(3), 42–54.Google Scholar
  53. Isen, A. M., Daubman, K. A., & Nowicki, G. P. (1987). Positive affect facilitates creative problem solving. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1122–1131.Google Scholar
  54. Jaccard, J., & Turrisi, R. (2003). Interaction effects in multiple regression. Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  55. James, L. R., Mulaik, S. S., & Brett, J. M. (1982). Causal analysis: Assumptions, models, and data. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  56. Jordan, J., & Jones, P. (1997). Assessing your company’s knowledge management style. Long Range Planning, 30(3), 392–398.Google Scholar
  57. Kellermanns, F. W., Walter, J., Lechner, C., & Floyd, S. W. (2005). The lack of consensus about strategic consensus: advancing theory and research. Journal of Management, 31(5), 719–737.Google Scholar
  58. King, A. (2007). Cooperation between corporations and environmental groups: a transaction cost perspective. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 889–900.Google Scholar
  59. Klassen, R. D., & McLaughlin, C. P. (1996). The impact of environmental management on firm performance. Management Science, 42(8), 1199–1214.Google Scholar
  60. Klassen, R. D., & Whybark, D. C. (1999). The impact of environment technologies on manufacturing performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42(6), 599–615.Google Scholar
  61. Klein, A., & Hauf, V. (2009). Sustainability-driven implementation of corporate social responsibility: application of the integrative sustainability triangle. Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 517–533.Google Scholar
  62. Kolk, A., & Pinkse, J. (2007). Towards strategic stakeholder management: integrating perspectives on sustainability challenges such as corporate responses to climate change. Corporate Governance, 7(4), 370–378.Google Scholar
  63. Kumar, K., Subramanian, R., & Yauger, C. (1998). Examining the market orientation–performance relationship: a context-specific study. Journal of Management, 24(2), 201–233.Google Scholar
  64. Laine, M. (2010). The nature of nature as a stakeholder. Journal of Business Ethics, 96, 73–78.Google Scholar
  65. Lomax, R. G. (1992). Statistical concepts: A second course for education and the behavioral sciences. White Plains, NY: Longman Publishing Group.Google Scholar
  66. Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 135–172.Google Scholar
  67. Luo, X., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2006). Corporate social responsibility, customer satisfaction, and market value. Journal of Marketing, 70(October), 1–18.Google Scholar
  68. Marcati, A., Guido, G., & Peluso, A. M. (2008). The role of SME entrepreneurs’ innovativeness and personality in the adoption of innovations. Research Policy, 37(9), 1579–1590.Google Scholar
  69. Marcus, A. A., & Anderson, M. H. (2006). A general dynamic capability: does it propagate business and social competencies in the retail food industry? Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 19–46.Google Scholar
  70. Meek, W. R., Pacheco, D. F., & York, J. G. (2010). The impact of social norms on entrepreneurial action: evidence from the environmental entrepreneurship context. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(5), 493–509.Google Scholar
  71. Menguc, B., Auh, S., & Ozanne, L. (2010). The interactive effects of internal and external factors on a proactive environmental strategy and its influence on a firm’s performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 94, 279–298.Google Scholar
  72. Mitchell, L. D., & Harrison, D. E. (2012). Greenwashing to green innovation in automotives and beyond. Business Renaissance Quarterly, 7(1), 107–116.Google Scholar
  73. Molina-Castillo, F. J., & Munuera-Aleman, J. L. (2009). The joint impact of quality and innovativeness on short-term new product performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 38(8), 984–993.Google Scholar
  74. Moss, T. W., Short, J. C., Payne, G. T., & Lumpkin, G. T. (2011). Dual identities in social ventures: an exploratory study. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 35, 805–830.Google Scholar
  75. Muller, S. L., & Thomas, A. S. (2001). Culture and entrepreneurial potential: a nine country study of locus of control and innovativeness. Journal of Business Venturing, 16(1), 51–75.Google Scholar
  76. Narver, J. C., & Slater, S. F. (1990). The effect of a market orientation on business profitability. Journal of Marketing, 54(4), 20–35.Google Scholar
  77. Nasi, J. (1982). Towards a deeper comprehension of the social responsibility firms: Some philosophical, conceptual and methodological frameworks for scientific research. In social responsibility in marketing. (Turku: Publication of the Turku School of Economics, Series A-2).Google Scholar
  78. Olinsky, A., Chen, S., & Harlow, L. (2003). The comparative efficacy of imputation methods for missing data in structural equation modeling’. European Journal of Operational Research, 151(1), 53–79.Google Scholar
  79. Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: a meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24(3), 403–441.Google Scholar
  80. Pandey, A., & Gupta, R. K. (2008). A perspective of collective consciousness of business organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 80, 889–898.Google Scholar
  81. Pees, R. C., Hostetter Schoop, G., & Zieganfuss, J. T. (2009). Organizational consciousness. Journal of Health Organization and Management, 23(5), 505–521.Google Scholar
  82. Peteraf, M. (1993). The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 14(3), 179–191.Google Scholar
  83. Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. L. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 531–544.Google Scholar
  84. Porter, M. E., & Van der Linde, C. (1995). Green and competitive: ending the stalemate. Harvard Business Review, 73(5), 120–134.Google Scholar
  85. Powell, T. C. (1996). How much does industry matter? An alternative empirical test. Strategic Management Journal, 17(4), 323–334.Google Scholar
  86. Pruzan, P. (2001). The question of organizational consciousness: can organizations have values, virtues and visions?’. Journal of Business Ethics, 29, 271–284.Google Scholar
  87. Reed, R., & Defillippi, R. J. (1990). Causal ambiguity, barriers to imitation, and sustainable competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 15(1), 88–102.Google Scholar
  88. Robinson, S. L., & Bennett, R. J. (1995). A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: a multidimensional scaling study. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2), 555–572.Google Scholar
  89. Rodan, S. (2004). More than network structure: how knowledge heterogeneity influences managerial performance and innovativeness. Strategic Management Journal, 25(6), 541–562.Google Scholar
  90. Roeck, K., & Delobbe, N. (2012). Do environmental CSR initiatives serve organizations’ legitimacy in the oil industry? Exploring employees’ reactions through organizational identification theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 110(4), 397–412.Google Scholar
  91. Roome, N., & Wijen, F. (2006). Stakeholder power and organizational learning in corporate environmental management. Organization Studies, 27(2), 235–263.Google Scholar
  92. Roxas, B., & Coetzer, A. (2012). Institutional environment, managerial attitudes and environmental sustainability orientation in small firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 111, 461–476.Google Scholar
  93. Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (1998). Corporate strategy and environmental regulation: an organizing framework. Strategic Management Journal, 19(Special Issue), 363–375.Google Scholar
  94. Russo, M. V., & Fouts, P. A. (1997). A resource-based perspective on corporate environmental performance and profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 534–559.Google Scholar
  95. Salancik, G. R., & Meindl, J. R. (1984). Corporate attributions as strategic illusions of management control. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(2), 238–254.Google Scholar
  96. Schildt, H. A., Maula, M. V. J., & Keli, T. (2005). Explorative and exploitative learning from external corporate ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(4), 493–515.Google Scholar
  97. Schilling, M. A., & Hill, C. W. L. (1998). Managing the new product development process: strategic imperatives. Academy of Management Executive, 12(3), 67–81.Google Scholar
  98. Sharma, S., & Vredenburg, H. (1998). Proactive corporate environmental strategy and the development of competitively valuable organizational capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 729–753.Google Scholar
  99. Siegel, D. S. (2009). Green management matters only if it yields more green: an economic/strategic perspective. Academy of Management Perspective, 23(3), 5–16.Google Scholar
  100. Siemsen, E., Roth, A., & Oliveira, P. (2010). Common method bias in regression models with linear, quadratic, and interaction Effects. Organizational Research Methods, 13, 456–476.Google Scholar
  101. Sirmon, D. G., Hitt, M. A., & Ireland, R. D. (2007). Managing firm resources in dynamic environments to create value: looking inside the black box. Academy of Management Review, 32(1), 273–292.Google Scholar
  102. Spreitzer, G. M., & Sonenshein, S. (2003). Positive deviance and extraordinary organizing. In K. S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship: Foundations of a new discipline (Vol. 1, pp. 48–65). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.Google Scholar
  103. Stanwick, P. A., & Stanwick, S. D. (1998). The relationship between corporate social performance, and organizational size, financial performance, and environmental performance: an empirical examination. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(2), 195–204.Google Scholar
  104. Starik, M. (1995). Should trees have managerial standing? Toward stakeholder status for non-human nature. Journal of Business Ethics, 14, 207–217.Google Scholar
  105. Stead, W. E., & Stead, J. G. (1996). Management for a small planet (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  106. Tajeddini, K., Trueman, M., & Larsen, G. (2006). Examining the effect of market orientation on innovativeness. Journal of Marketing Management, 22, 529–551.Google Scholar
  107. Veugelers, R. (1997). Internal R&D expenditures and external technology sourcing. Research Policy, 26(3), 303–315.Google Scholar
  108. Vredenburg, H., & Westley, F. (1997). Fostering innovation toward sustainability in renewable resource industries: the effects of regulation on organizational response. Optimum: The Journal of Public Sector Management, 27(2), 32–40.Google Scholar
  109. Wagner, M. (2010). Corporate social performance and innovation with high social benefits: a quantitative analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 94, 581–594.Google Scholar
  110. York, J. G. (2009). Pragmatic sustainability: translating environmental ethics into competitive advantage. Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 97–109.Google Scholar
  111. York, J. G., & Venkataraman, S. (2010). The entrepreneurship–environment nexus: uncertainty, innovation and allocation. Journal of Business Venturing, 25, 449–463.Google Scholar
  112. Yuan, F., & Woodman, R. W. (2010). Innovative behavior in the workplace: the role of performance and image outcome expectations. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 323–342.Google Scholar
  113. Zach, M. H. (1999). Managing codified knowledge. Sloan Management Review, 40(4), 45–58.Google Scholar
  114. Zahra, S. A., Rawhouser, H. N., Bhawe, N., Neubaum, D. O., & Hayton, J. C. (2008). Globalization of social entrepreneurship. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 2, 117–131.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Clay Dibrell
    • 1
    Email author
  • Justin B. Craig
    • 2
  • Jaemin Kim
    • 3
  • Aaron J. Johnson
    • 4
  1. 1.School of Business AdministrationThe University of MississippiUniversityUSA
  2. 2.D’Amore-McKim School of BusinessNortheastern UniversityBostonUSA
  3. 3.School of BusinessThe Richard Stockton College of NJGallowayUSA
  4. 4.College of Agricultural and Life SciencesUniversity IdahoMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations