The Three Dimensions of Sustainability: A Delicate Balancing Act for Entrepreneurs Made More Complex by Stakeholder Expectations
Previous research on sustainable entrepreneurship has mainly aimed to understand the antecedents of entrepreneurs’ sustainability-oriented behavior. Yet the literature lacks a more nuanced understanding of how entrepreneurs implement sustainability strategies when creating a new venture. Drawing on sustainability concepts, we first examine how entrepreneurs balance the economic, environmental, and social dimensions as part of their ventures’ strategic ambitions. We show that sustainable entrepreneurs prioritize the three sustainability dimensions and possibly reprioritize them in response to stakeholder interests. Applying a stakeholder theory perspective, we theorize that how entrepreneurs balance their sustainability dimensions and goals depends on the degree of stakeholder involvement and of external expectations. Our contributions refine the growing sustainable entrepreneurship literature and call attention to the importance of including weightings and time when examining the dimensions of sustainability.
KeywordsSustainable entrepreneurship Sustainability Stakeholder theory Case study research
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Clarkson, M. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Journal, 20(1), 92–117.Google Scholar
- Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research (3rd edn.). Thousand Oaks: CA Sage.Google Scholar
- Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Gabriola Island: New Society.Google Scholar
- Freeman, E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston, MA: Pitman.Google Scholar
- Munoz, P., & Cohen, B. 2017. Sustainable entrepreneurship research: Taking stock and looking ahead. Business Strategy and the Environment, 27(3), 300–322.Google Scholar
- Parrish, B. D., & Foxon, T. J. (2009). Sustainability entrepreneurship and equitable transitions to a low-carbon economy. Greener Management International, 55, 47–62.Google Scholar
- Reja, U., Manfreda, K. L., & Hlebec, V. 2003. Open-ended vs. close-ended questions in web questionnaires. Developments in Applied Statistics, 19(1), 159–177.Google Scholar
- Reynolds, O., Sheehan, M., & Hilliard, R. 2017. Exploring strategic agency in sustainability-oriented entrepreneur legitimation. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 24(2), 429–450Google Scholar
- Schlange, L. E. (2009). Stakeholder identification in sustainability entrepreneurship: The role of managerial and organisational cognition. Greener Management International, 55, 13–33.Google Scholar
- Tarnanidis, T., Papathanasiou, J., & Subeniotis, D. 2017. How far the TBL concept of sustainable entrepreneurship extends beyond the various sustainability regulations: Can Greek food manufacturing enterprises sustain their hybrid nature over time? Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3443-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Tilley, F., & Young, W. (2009). Sustainability entrepreneurs: Could they be the true wealth generators of the future? Greener Management International, 55, 79–92.Google Scholar
- Van de Ven, A. H. (2007). Engaged scholarship: A guide for organizational and social research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Wagner, M., Schaltegger, S., & Wehrmeyer, W. (2002). The relationship between the environmental and economic performance of firms. What does theory propose and what does empirical evidence tell us? Greener Management International, 34, 95–108.Google Scholar
- Walley, N., & Whitehead, B. (1994). It’s not easy being green. Harvard Business Review, 72(3), 46–51.Google Scholar
- WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development). (1987). Our common future. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Winn, M. I., & Kirchgeorg, M. 2005. The siesta is over: A rude awakening from sustainability myopia. In S. Sharma & M. Starik (Eds.) New perspective in research in corporate sustainability (pp. 232–258). Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.Google Scholar
- Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd edn.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar