How Do Firms Comply with International Sustainability Standards? Processes and Consequences of Adopting the Global Reporting Initiative
- 4.1k Downloads
This paper addresses the issue of the influence of global governance institutions, particularly international sustainability standards, on a firm’s intra-organizational practices. More precisely, we provide an exploratory empirical view of the impact of the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) on a multinational corporation’s corporate social responsibility (CSR) management practices. We investigate standard compliance by comparing the stated intention of the use of the GRI with its actual use and the consequent effects within the firm. Based on an in-depth case study, our findings illustrate the processes and consequences of the translation of the GRI within the organization. We show that substantive standard adoption can lead to unintended consequences on CSR management practices; specifically it can influence the management structure and CSR committee function; the choice of CSR activities, the relationships between subsidiaries, the temporal dimension of CSR management and the interpretation of CSR performance. We also highlight the need to look at the relationship dynamics (or lack of) between standards. Finally, we illustrate and discuss the role of reporting and its influence on management in order to better understand the internal issues arising from compliance with standards.
KeywordsCompliance Corporate social responsibility Global Reporting Initiative Qualitative case study Standardization Translation
- Berger, P., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality. New York: Anchor.Google Scholar
- Boxenbaum, E. (2006a). Corporate social responsibility as institutional hybrids. Journal of Business Strategies, 23(1), 45–63.Google Scholar
- Boxenbaum, E., & Strandgaard Pedersen, J. (2009). Scandinavian institutionalism: A case of institutional work. In T. B. Lawrence, R. Suddaby, & B. Leca (Eds.), Institutional work: Actors and agency in institutional studies of organization (pp. 178–204). Cambridge, MA: University of Cambridge Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Braithwaite, J. (2011). The essence of responsive regulation. UBC Law Review, 44(3), 475–520.Google Scholar
- Corley, K. G., & Gioia, D. A. (2004). Identity ambiguity and change in the wake of a corporate spin-off. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49(2), 173–208.Google Scholar
- Djelic, M.-L., & Sahlin-Andersson, K. (2006). Introduction: A world of governance: The rise of transnational regulation. In M.-L. Djelic & K. Sahlin-Andersson (Eds.), Transnational governance: Institutional dynamics of regulation (pp. 1–28). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Drori, G. S., Meyer, J. W., & Hwang, H. (2006). Globalization and organization: World society and organizational change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Edelman, L. B., & Talesh, S. A. (2011). To comply or not to comply—That isn’t the question: How organizations construct the meaning of compliance. In C. Parker & V. L. Nielsen (Eds.), Explaining compliance: Business responses to regulation (pp. 103–122). Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
- GRI. (2011a). About GRI. https://www.globalreporting.org/information/about-gri/Pages/default.aspx.
- GRI. (2011b). Application level information. https://www.globalreporting.org/reporting/reporting-framework-overview/application-level-information/Pages/default.aspx.
- GRI. (2011c). Sustainability reporting guidelines G3.1. https://www.globalreporting.org/resourcelibrary/G3.1-Guidelines-Incl-Technical-Protocol.pdf.
- GRI. (2013). Sustainability reporting guidelines—G4. https://www.globalreporting.org/resourcelibrary/GRIG4-Part1-Reporting-Principles-and-Standard-Disclosures.pdf.
- Jacobsson, B., & Sahlin-Andersson, K. (2006). Dynamics of soft regulations. In M.-L. Djelic & K. Sahlin-Andersson (Eds.), Transnational governance: Institutional dynamics of regulation (pp. 247–265). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Kobrin, S. J. (2008). Globalization, transnational corporations and the future of global governance. In A. G. Scherer & G. Palazzo (Eds.), Handbook of research on global corporate citizenship (pp. 249–272). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
- KPMG. (2011). KPMG international survey of corporate responsibility reporting 2011. http://www.kpmg.com/Ca/en/IssuesAndInsights/ArticlesPublications/Documents/CSR%20Survey%202011.pdf.
- Langley, A. (1999). Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 691–710.Google Scholar
- Langley, A., & Abdallah, C. (2011). Templates and turns in qualitative studies of strategy and management. In D. D. Bergh & D. J. Ketchen (Eds.), Building methodological bridges. Research methodology in strategy and management (pp. 201–235). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Levy, D. L., & Kaplan, R. (2007). CSR and theories of global governance: Strategic contestation in global issue arenas. In A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon, & D. Siegel (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of CSR (pp. 432–451). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Matten, D. & Moon, J. (2008). “Implicit” and “Explicit” CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 404–424.Google Scholar
- McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions of man. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
- Silverman, D. (2002). Interpreting qualitative data. Methods for analysing talk, text and interaction (2nd ed.). London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar