Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 104, Issue 3, pp 325–345 | Cite as

Beyond the Bounded Instrumentality in Current Corporate Sustainability Research: Toward an Inclusive Notion of Profitability

Article

Abstract

We argue that the majority of the current approaches in research on corporate sustainability are inconsistent with the notion of sustainable development. By defining the notion of instrumentality in the context of corporate sustainability through three conceptual principles we show that current approaches are rooted in a bounded notion of instrumentality which establishes a systematic a priori predominance of economic organizational outcomes over environmental and social aspects. We propose an inclusive notion of profitability that reflects the return on all forms of environmental, social, and economic capital used by a firm. This inclusive notion of corporate profitability helps to redefine corporate profitability as if sustainability matters in that it overcomes the bounded instrumentality that impairs current research on corporate sustainability. We apply this notion to different car manufacturers and develop conceptual implications for future research on corporate sustainability.

Keywords

Corporate sustainability Corporate objective function Instrumentality Profitability Car industry 

References

  1. Aguilera, R. V., Rupp, D. E., Williams, C. A., & Ganapathi, J. (2007). Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: A multilevel theory of social change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 836–863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahmadjian, C. L., & Robinson, P. (2001). Safety in numbers: Downsizing and the deinstitutionalization of permanent employment in Japan. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(4), 622–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aragón-Correa, J. A., & Rubio-López, E. A. (2007). Proactive corporate environmental strategies: Myths and misunderstandings. Long Range Planning, 40(3), 357–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aragón-Correa, J. A., & Sharma, S. (2003). A contingent resource-based view of proactive corporate environmental strategy. Academy of Management Review, 28(1), 71–88.Google Scholar
  5. Atkinson, G. (2000). Measuring corporate sustainability. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 43(2), 235–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Banerjee, S. B. (2001). Managerial perceptions of corporate environmentalism: Interpretations from industry and strategic implications for organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 38(4), 489–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bansal, P. (2002). The corporate challenges of sustainable development. Academy of Management Executive, 16(2), 122–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bansal, P. (2005). Evolving sustainably: A longitudinal study of corporate sustainable development. Strategic Management Journal, 26(3), 197–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bansal, P., & Gao, J. (2006). Building the future by looking into the Past. Examining research published on organizations and the environment. Organization & Environment, 19(4), 458–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Barbier, E. (1987). The concept of sustainable economic development. Environmental Conservation, 14(2), 101–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Barnett, M. L. (2007). Stakeholder influence capacity and the variability of financial returns to corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 794–816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bennett, M., & James, P. (1999). Sustainable measures: Evaluation and reporting of environmental and social performance. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishers.Google Scholar
  14. Berkhout, P. H. G., Muskens, J. C., & Velthuijsen, J. W. (2000). Defining the rebound effect. Energy Policy, 28, 425–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Boron, S., & Murray, K. (2004). Bridging the unsustainability gap: A framework for sustainable development. Sustainable Development, 12(2), 65–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Burke, L., & Logsdon, J. M. (1996). How corporate social responsibility pays off. Long Range Planning, 29(4), 495–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cabeza Gutés, M. (1996). The concept of weak sustainability. Ecological Economics, 17(3), 147–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Clarkson, M. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 92–117.Google Scholar
  19. Costanza, R., & Daly, H. E. (1992). Natural capital and sustainable development. Conservation Biology, 6(1), 37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cramer, J. (2002). From financial to sustainable profit. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 9(2), 99–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Crouch, C. (2006). Modeling the firm in its market and organizational environment: Methodologies for studying corporate social responsibility. Organization Studies, 27(10), 1533–1551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Daly, H. (1992). Steady-state economics. London: Earthscan Publications.Google Scholar
  23. DeSimone, L. D., & Popoff, F. (1998). Eco-efficiency. The business link to sustainable development. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  24. Dyllick, T., & Hockerts, K. (2002). Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment, 11(2), 130–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Elkington, J. (1994). Towards a sustainable corporation: Win-Win-Win business strategies for sustainable development. California Management Review, 36(2), 90–100.Google Scholar
  26. Elliott, S. R. (2005). Sustainability: An economic perspective. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 44(3), 263–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Epstein, M. J., & Roy, M. -J. (1997). Environmental management to improve corporate profitability. Journal of Cost Management, 26–34.Google Scholar
  28. Epstein, M. J., & Roy, M.-J. (2001). Sustainability in action: Identifying and measuring the key performance drivers. Long Range Planning, 34(5), 585–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Epstein, M. J., Roy, M. -J. (2003). Making the business case for sustainability. Linking social and environmental actions to financial performance. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 9(Spring), 79–96.Google Scholar
  30. Epstein, M. J., & Young, S. D. (1998). Improving corporate environmental performance through economic value added. Environmental Quality Management, 7(4), 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Etzion, D. (2007). Research on organizations and the natural environment, 1992-present: A review. Journal of Management, 33(4), 637–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Farmer, M. C., & Randall, A. (1998). The rationality of a safe minimum standard. Land Economics, 74(3), 287–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Feibel, B. J. (2003). Investment performance measurement. Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  34. Figge, F. (2001). Environmental value added—Ein neues Maß zur Messung der Öko-Effizienz (Environmental value added—A new approach to measuring eco-efficiency). Zeitschrift für angewandte Umweltforschung, 14(1–4), 184–197.Google Scholar
  35. Figge, F. (2005). Value-based environmental management. From environmental shareholder value to environmental option value. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 12(1), 19–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Figge, F., & Hahn, T. (2004a). Sustainable value added—Measuring corporate contributions to sustainability beyond eco-efficiency. Ecological Economics, 48(2), 173–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Figge, F., & Hahn, T. (2004b). Value-oriented impact assessment: The economics of a new approach to impact assessment. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 47(6), 921–941.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Figge, F., & Hahn, T. (2005). The cost of sustainability capital and the creation of sustainable value by companies. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 9(4), 47–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Fineman, S. (1996). Emotional subtexts in corporate greening. Organization Studies, 17(3), 479–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Fiss, P. C., & Zajac, E. J. (2004). The diffusion of ideas over contested terrain: The (Non)adoption of a shareholder value orientation among German firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49(4), 501–534.Google Scholar
  41. Fiss, P. C., & Zajac, E. J. (2006). The symbolic management of strategic change: Sensegiving via framing and decoupling. Academy of Management Journal, 49(6), 1173–1193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Florida, R. (1996). Lean and green: The move to environmentally conscious manufacturing. California Management Review, 39(1), 80–105.Google Scholar
  43. Friedman, M. (1970, September 13). The social responsibility of business is to increase profits. The New York Times Magazine, 32–33, 122–126.Google Scholar
  44. Garud, R., Hardy, C., & Maguire, S. (2007). Institutional entrepreneurship as embedded agency: An introduction to the special issue. Organization Studies, 28(7), 957–969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Gladwin, T. (1993). The meaning of greening. In J. Schot & K. Fischer (Eds.), Environmental strategies for industry (pp. 37–61). Washington: Island Press.Google Scholar
  46. Gladwin, T. N., Kennelly, J. J., & Krause, T.-S. (1995a). Shifting paradigms for sustainable development: Implications for management theory and research. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 874–907.Google Scholar
  47. Gladwin, T. N., Krause, T.-S., & Kennelly, J. J. (1995b). Beyond eco-efficiency: Towards socially sustainable business. Sustainable Development, 3(1), 35–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Goodall, A. H. (2008). Why have the leading journals in management (and other social sciences) failed to respond to climate change? Journal of Management Inquiry, 17(4), 408–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Gray, R. (2001). Thirty years of social accounting, reporting and auditing: What (if anything) have we learnt? Business Ethics, 10(1), 9–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Green, D. I. (1894). Pain-cost and opportunity-cost. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 8(2), 218–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Greenwood, R., Suddaby, R., & Hinings, C. R. (2002). Theorizing change: The role of professional associations in the transformation of institutionalized fields. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 58–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Griffin, J., & Mahon, J. (1997). The corporate social performance and corporate financial performance debate: Twenty-five years of incomparable research. Business & Society, 36(1), 5–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Hahn, T., Figge, F., Pinkse, J., & Preuss, L. (2010). Trade-offs in corporate sustainability: You can’t have your cake and eat It. Business Strategy and the Environment, 19(4), 217–229.Google Scholar
  54. Hanley, N. (2000). Macroeconomic measures of sustainability. Journal of Economic Surveys, 14(1), 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Hart, S. (1995). A natural-resource-based view of the firm. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 986–1014.Google Scholar
  56. Harte, M. (1995). Ecology, sustainability, and the environment as capital. Ecological Economics, 15(2), 157–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Herbohn, K. (2005). A full cost environmental accounting experiment. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 30(6), 519–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Hicks, J. R. (1946). Value and capital: An inquiry into some fundamental principles of economic theory (2nd ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  59. Huang, P. C. (1933). Opportunity cost. American Economic Review, 23(1), 82–85.Google Scholar
  60. Huizing, A., & Dekker, H. C. (1992). Helping to pull our planet out of the red: An environmental report of BSO/origin. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17(5), 449–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Husted, B. W., & de Jesus Salazar, J. (2006). Taking Friedman seriously: Maximizing profits and social performance. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 75–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. ISO. (1999). ISO 14031:1999 Environmental management—Environmental performance evaluation—standards and guidelines. Geneva: International Organisation for Standardization (ISO).Google Scholar
  63. Jasch, C. (2000). Environmental performance evaluation and indicators. Journal of Cleaner Production, 8(1), 79–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Jensen, M. C. (2001). Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 14(3), 8–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Jones, T. (1995). Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics. Academy of Management Review, 20(2), 404–437.Google Scholar
  67. Kallio, T., & Nordberg, P. (2006). The evolution of organizations and natural environment discourse. Organization & Environment, 19(4), 439–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Klassen, R. D., & Whybark, D. C. (1999). The impact of environmental technologies on manufacturing performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42(6), 599–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Kolk, A. (2008). Sustainability, accountability and corporate governance: Exploring multinationals’ reporting practices. Business Strategy & the Environment, 17(1), 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Lawrence, A., & Morell, D. (1995). Leading-edge environmental management: Motivation, opportunity, resources, and processes. Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy Supplement, 1, 99–126.Google Scholar
  71. Lawrence, T. B., & Suddaby, R. (2006). Institutions and institutional work. In S. Clegg, C. Hardy, T. B. Lawrence, & W. R. Nord (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organization studies (pp. 215–254). London and Thousand Oaks: SAGE.Google Scholar
  72. Litz, R. (1996). A resource-based-view of the socially responsible firm: Stakeholder interdependence, ethical awareness, and issue responsiveness as strategic assets. Journal of Business Ethics, 15, 1355–1363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Lo, S.-F., & Sheu, H.-J. (2007). Is corporate sustainability a value-increasing strategy for business? Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15(2), 345–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Lockett, A., Moon, J., & Visser, W. (2006). Corporate social responsibility in management research: Focus, nature, salience and sources of influence. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 115–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Lovett, J. (2001). Ownership of environmental values and opportunity costs. Environment and Planning C, 19(5), 681–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Maguire, S., Hardy, C., & Lawrence, T. B. (2004). Institutional entrepreneurship in emerging fields: HIV/AIDS treatment advocacy in Canada. Academy of Management Journal, 47(5), 657–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 268–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Maxwell, J., Rothenberg, S., Briscoe, F., & Marcus, A. (1997). Green schemes: Corporate environmental strategies and their implementation. California Management Review, 39(3), 118–134.Google Scholar
  79. McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2000). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: Correlation or misspecification? Strategic Management Journal, 21(5), 603–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Mitnick, B. (2000). Commitment, revelation, and testaments of belief: The metrics of measurement of corporate social performance. Business & Society, 39(4), 419–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Modigliani, F., & Miller, M. H. (1958). The cost of capital, corporation finance and the theory of investment. American Economic Review, 48(3), 261–297.Google Scholar
  82. Nielsen, N. C. (1976). The investment decision of the firm under uncertainty and the allocative efficiency of capital markets. The Journal of Finance, 31, 587–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24(3), 403–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Pearce, D. W., & Atkinson, G. (1993). Capital Theory and the measurement of sustainable development: An indicator of ‘Weak’ sustainability. Ecological Economics, 8(2), 103–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Peloza, J. (2009). The challenge of measuring financial impacts from investments in corporate social performance. Journal of Management, 35(6), 1518–1541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Phillips, N., Lawrence, T. B., & Hardy, C. (2004). Discourse and institutions. Academy of Management Review, 29(4), 635–652.Google Scholar
  87. Prasad, P., & Elmes, M. (2005). In the name of the practical: Unearthing the hegemony of pragmatics in the discourse of environmental management. Journal of Management Studies, 42(4), 845–867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Purser, R. E., Park, C., & Montuori, A. (1995). Limits to anthropocentrism: Toward an ecocentric organization paradigm? Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 1053–1089.Google Scholar
  89. Rappaport, A. (1986). Creating shareholder value: The new standard for business performance. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  90. Reinhardt, F. (1998). Environmental product differentiation: Implications for corporate strategy. California Management Review, 40(4), 43–73.Google Scholar
  91. Reinhardt, F. (1999). Market failure and the environmental policies of firms. Economic rationales for “Beyond Compliance” behavior. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 3(1), 9–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Reinhardt, F. (2000a). Down to earth. Applying business principles to environmental management. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  93. Reinhardt, F. (2000b). Sustainability and the firm. Interfaces, 30(3), 26–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Romero Castro, N., & Piñeiro Chousa, J. (2006). An integrated framework for the financial analysis of sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment, 15(5), 322–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Roome, N. J. (1998). Sustainability strategies for industry: The future of corporate practice. Washington: Island Press.Google Scholar
  96. Rowley, T., & Berman, S. (2000). A brand new brand of corporate social performance. Business & Society, 39(4), 397–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Rubenstein, D. B. (1994). Environmental accounting for the sustainable corporation: Strategies and techniques. Westport, Connecticut: Quorum Books.Google Scholar
  98. Ruf, B., Muralidhar, K., & Paul, K. (1998). The development of a systematic, aggregate measure of corporate social performance. Journal of Management, 24(1), 119–133.Google Scholar
  99. Russo, M., & Fouts, P. (1997). A resource-based perspective on corporate environmental performance and profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 534–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Salzmann, O., Ionescu-Somers, A., & Steger, U. (2005). The business case for corporate sustainability: Literature review and research options. European Management Journal, 23(1), 27–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Schaltegger, S., & Burritt, R. (2000). Contemporary environmental accounting: Issues, concepts and practice. Sheffield: Greenleaf.Google Scholar
  102. Schepers, D. H., & Sethi, S. P. (2003). Do socially responsible funds actually deliver what they promise? Bridging the gap between the promise and performance of socially responsible funds. Business and Society Review, 108(1), 11–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Schmidheiny, S. (1992). Changing course: A global business perspective on development and the environment. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  104. Sharma, S., & Starik, M. (Eds.). (2002). Research in corporate sustainability: The evolving theory and practice of organizations in the natural environment. London: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  105. Sharma, S., & Vredenburg, H. (1998). Proactive corporate environmental strategy and the development of competitively valuable organizational capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 19(8), 729–753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Shrivastava, P. (1995). The role of corporations in achieving ecological sustainability. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 936–960.Google Scholar
  107. Solow, R. (1986). On the intergenerational allocation of natural resources. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 88(1), 141–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Soppe, A. (2004). Sustainable corporate finance. Journal of Business Ethics, 53(1/2), 213–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Souter, R. W. (1932). Land, capital and opportunity cost. American Economic Review, 22(2), 203–207.Google Scholar
  110. Springett, D. (2003). Business conceptions of sustainable development: A perspective from critical theory. Business Strategy and the Environment, 12(2), 71–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Stern, D. I. (1997). The capital theory approach to sustainability: A critical appraisal. Journal of Economic Issues, 31(1), 145–173.Google Scholar
  112. Stewart, G. B. (1991). The quest for value. The EVA management guide. New York: HarperBusiness.Google Scholar
  113. Tol, R. S. J. (2005). The marginal damage costs of carbon dioxide emissions: An assessment of the uncertainties. Energy Policy, 33(16), 2064–2074.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Ullmann, A. (1985). Data in search of a theory: A critical examination of the relationships among social performance, social disclosure, and economic performance. Academy of Management Review, 10, 540–577.Google Scholar
  115. U.S. President’s Councilon Sustainable Development. (1994). A vision for a sustainable U.S. and principles of sustainable development. Washington, DC: U.S. President’s Council on Sustainable Development.Google Scholar
  116. WBCSD. (2000). Eco-efficiency. Creating more value with less impact. Geneva: World Business Council for Sustainable Development.Google Scholar
  117. WCED. (1987). Our common future. Oxford: World Commission on Environment and Development and Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  118. Westley, F., & Vredenburg, H. (1996). Sustainability and the corporation: Criteria for aligning economic practice with environmental protection. Journal of Management Inquiry, 5(2), 104–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Williamson, O. (1981). The economics of organizations: The transaction cost approach. American Journal of Sociology, 87(3), 548–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Young, W., & Tilley, F. (2006). Can businesses move beyond efficiency? The shift toward effectiveness and equity in the corporate sustainability debate. Business Strategy and the Environment, 15(6), 402–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Euromed Management SchoolMarseille Cedex 9France

Personalised recommendations