Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Corporation is Ailing Social Technology: Creating a ‘Fit for Purpose’ Design for Sustainability

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

Abstract

Designed to facilitate economic development, the corporate form now threatens human survival. This article presents an argument that organisations are yet to be ‘fit for purpose’ and that the corporate form needs to be re-designed to reach sustainability. It suggests that organisations need to recognise their agent status amongst a much wider and highly complex array of interconnected, dynamic economic, environmental and social systems. Human Factors theory is drawn on to propose that business systems could be made sustainable through re-design. They could fit their environment more appropriately by improving: Efficiency, Adaptability and Social Cohesion. Leaders of organisations would also need to take a holistic approach to alter the organisation proactively to adapt to the systems within which it is embedded.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Accenture. (2010). A New Era of Sustainability: CEO reflections on progress to date, challenges ahead and the impact of the journey toward a sustainable economy. Accenture Institute for High Performance.

  • Ainslie, G. (1975). Specious reward: A behavioral/theory of impulsiveness and impulse control. Psychological Bulletin, 82(4), 463–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, P. (1999). Complexity theory and organization science. Organization Science, 10, 216–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Annan, K. (2002). Toward a sustainable future. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 44(7), 10–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arena, C. (2004). Cause for success: 10 companies that put profit second and came in first. Novato: New World Library.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armenakis, A. A., Harris, S. G., & Mossholder, K. W. (2011). Creating readiness for organisational change. Human Relations, 64(10), 681–703.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, D., & Boyle, S. E. (1977). Sales revenue maximization: An empirical investigation. Industrial Organization Review, 5(1), 46–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakan, J. (2004). The corporation: The pathological pursuit of profit and power. London: Constable & Robinson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, S. B. (2003). Who sustains whose development? Sustainable development and the reinvention of nature. Organization Studies, 24(2), 143–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bannerjee, S. B. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: The good, the bad and the ugly. Critical Sociology, 34(1), 51–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bansal, P. (2002). The corporate challenges of sustainable development. Academy of Management Executive, 16(2), 122–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basu, K., & Palazzo, G. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: A process model of sensemaking. The Academy of Management Review, 33(1), 122–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, G. (1968). Crime and punishment: An economic approach. The Journal of Political Economy, 76(2), 169–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benn, S., & Baker, E. (2009). Advancing sustainability through change and innovation: A co-evolutionary perspective. Journal of Change Management, 9(4), 383–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benn, S., & Kramar, R. (2011). Educating for sustainability and CSR. What is the role of business schools? Introduction. Journal of Management & Organization, 17(5), 574–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benn, S., & Martin, A. (2010). Learning and change for sustainability reconsidered: A role for boundary objects. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9(3), 397–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berrone, P., Cruz, C., Gomez-Mejia, L. R., & Larraza Kintana, M. (2010). Ownership structure and corporate response to institutional pressures: Do family-controlled firms pollute less? Administrative Science Quarterly, 55, 82–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bingham, J. B., Dyer, G. W., Smith, I., & Adams, G. L. (2011). A stakeholder identity orientation approach to corporate social performance in family firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 99(4), 565–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackwell, R. (2008, November 10). The double-edged sword of corporate altruism. The Globe and Mail.

  • Boston Consulting Group. (2009). The business of sustainability: Imperatives, advantages and actions, Boston at http://www.bcg.com/documents/file29480.pdf. Accessed 20 August 2011.

  • Bohm, P. (1972). Estimating demand for public goods: An experiment. European Economic Review, 3(2), 111–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braungart, M., McDonough, M., & Bollinger, A. (2007). Cradle-to-cradle design: Creating healthy emissions—a strategy for eco-effective product and system design. Journal of Cleaner Production, 15(13–14), 1337–1348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brubaker, E. R. (1975). Free ride, free revelation or golden rule? The Journal of Law and Economics, 18(1), 147–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, W. W., & Hornstein, H. A. (1972). The social technology of organization development. Fairfax, VA: Learning Resources Corp./University of Michigan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. L. (2006). Institutional analysis and the paradox of corporate social responsibility. The American Behavioral Scientist, 49(7), 925–938.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organisational stakeholders (Balancing Economic, Legal, and Social Responsibilities). Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Catton, W. R., & Dunlap, R. E. (1978). Paradigms, theories, and the primacy of the HEP-NEP distinction. The American Sociologist, 13(Nov), 256–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, K. C., Fung, H., & Yau, J. (2010). Business ethics research: A global perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 95, 39–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chase, S. (2007, October 1). Climate change top issue, CEOs declare. The Globe and Mail.

  • Chort, V. (2007, December 3). Climate change is more than hot air and protocol. The Globe and Mail.

  • Cohen-Rosenthal, E. (2000). A walk on the human side of industrial ecology. American Behavioral Scientist, 44, 245–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colbert, B. A. (2004). The complex resource-based view: Implications for theory and practice in strategic human resource management. Academy of Management Review, 29, 341–358.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, A. (1982). Game theory and experimental games. New York: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, S. M., & Owen, D. L. (2007). Corporate social reporting and stakeholder accountability: The missing link. Accounting, Organisations and Society, 32(7–8), 649–667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawes, R. M., Orbell, J. M., & van de Kragt, J. C. (1986). Doing well and doing good as ways of resolving social dilemmas. In H. A. M. Wilke, D. M. Messick, & C. G. Rutte (Eds.), Experimental social dilemmas (pp. 177–203). New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doh, J., & Guay, T. (2006). Corporate social responsibility, public policy, and NGO activism in Europe and the United States: An institutional-stakeholder perspective. Journal of Management Studies, Special Issue, Corporate Social Responsibility: Strategic Implications, 43, 47–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donadio, R., & Kitsantonis, N. (2011, October 19) Thousands in Greece protest austerity bill. The New York Times.

  • Donaldson, G., & Lorsch, J. W. (1983). Decision making at the top. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dooley, K. (1996). A nominal definition of complex adaptive systems. http://www.eas.asu.edu/~kdooley/casopdef.html. Accessed 13 October, 2009.

  • Dumas, J. S., & Salzman, M. C. (2006). Reviews of human factors and ergonomics (Vol. 2). Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.

  • Dunphy, D., Griffiths, A., & Benn, S. (2007). Organizational change for corporate sustainability: A guide for leaders and change agents of the future. Milton Park, Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyke, B., & Schroeder, D. (2005). Management, theology and moral points of view: Towards an alternative to the conventional materialist-individualist ideal-type of management. Journal of Management Studies, 42, 705–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, M. (2008). Just another emperor? The myths and realities of philanthrocapitalism. New York: Demos, A Network for Ideas & Action.

    Google Scholar 

  • Egri, C. P., & Herman, S. (2000). Leadership in the North American environmental sector: Values, leadership styles and contexts of environmental leaders and their organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 571–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrenfeld, J. (2000). Industrial ecology: Paradigm shift or normal science. American Behavioral Scientist, 44, 229–244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrenfeld, J. R. (2005). The roots of sustainability. MIT Sloan Management Review, 46(2), 23–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Einstein, A. (1946, May 25). Atomic education urged by Einstein: Scientists in plea for $200,000 to promote new type of essential thinking. The New York Times.

  • Friedman, M. (1970, September 3). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times.

  • Friedman, T. L. (2008). Hot, flat, and crowded 2.0: Why we need a green revolution—and how it can renew America. New York: Picador.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaddy, C. D., & Wachtel, J. A. (1992). Team skills training in nuclear power plant operations. In R. W. Swezey & E. Salas (Eds.), Teams: Their training and performance (pp. 379–396). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garnaut, R. (2011). The Garnaut review 2011: Australia in the global response to climate change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Garriga, E., & Mele, D. (2004). Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory. Journal of Business Ethics, 53(1/2), 51–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gintis, H., Bowles, S., Boyd, R., & Fehr, R. (2003). Explaining altruistic behaviour in humans. Evolution and Human Behaviour, 24, 153–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Global Compact Critics. (2008). UN’s new water advisor calls the Global Compact “bluewashing”. Global Compact Critics Blog. http://globalcompactcritics.blogspot.com/2008/12/uns-new-water-advisor-calls-global.html. Accessed 10 December 2008.

  • Gladwin, T. N., Kennelly, J. J., & Krause, T. (1995). Shifting paradigms for sustainable development: Implications for management theory and research. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 874–907.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Haynes, K. T., Nunez-Nickel, M., Jacobson, K. J. L., & Moyano-Fuentes, J. (2007). Socioemotional wealth and business risks in family-controlled firms: Evidence from Spanish olive oil mills. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(1), 106–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, P. S. (2008, July). Too big to fail? The New York Times. Retrieved 19 October 2011.

  • Gorman, J. C., Cooke, N. J., & Amazeen, P. G. (2010a). Training adaptive team. Human Factors, 52(2), 295–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorman, J. C., Cooke, N. J., & Salas, E. (2010b). Preface to the special issue on collaboration, coordination, and adaptation in complex sociotechnical settings. Human Factors, 52(2), 143–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorman, J. C., Cooke, N. J., & Winner, J. L. (2006). Measuring team situation awareness in decentralized command and control environments. Ergonomics, 49, 1312–1325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, A. M., Dutton, J. E., & Rosso, B. D. (2008). Giving commitment: Employee support programs and the prosocial sensemaking process. Academy of Management Journal, 51(5), 898–918.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grey, C. (2008). A very short, fairly interesting and reasonably cheap book about studying organisations. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grit, K. (2004). Corporate citizenship: How to strengthen the social responsibility of managers? Journal of Business Ethics, 53, 97–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guardian. (2011, October 17). The Occupy movement: From local action to a global howl of protest. The Guardian. Retrieved 19 October 2011.

  • Hart, S. L. (1995). A natural resource based view of the firm. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 996–1014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S. (2005). Capitalism at the crossroads: The unlimited business opportunities in solving the world’s most difficult problems. Philadelphia: Wharton School Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, D. (2005). A brief history of neoliberalism. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, F. (2007, January 22). Environment tops EU business leaders’ list of concerns. Financial Times, 8.

  • Hawken, P. (2007). Blessed unrest. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herendeen, J. B., & Schechter, M. C. (1977). Alternative models of the corporate enterprise: Growth maximization, an empirical test. Southern Economic Journal, 43(4), 1505–1514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, A. (2003). Linking social systems analysis to the industrial ecology framework. Organization & Environment, 16, 66–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holland, J. H. (1995). Hidden order: How adaptation builds complexity. Reading, MA: Helix Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, I. A., & Nelson, J. (2004). Profits with principles: Seven strategies for delivering value with values. New York, NY: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, M., & Millar, C. (2011). About global leadership and global ethics, and a possible moral compass: An introduction to the special issue. Journal of Business Ethics, 93, 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist, 58(9), 697–720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, G. (1999). Applied decision making. In P.A. Hancock (Ed.), Humans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse and abuse. Human Factors, 39, 230–253.

  • Klein, N. (2007). Shock doctrine: The rise of disaster capitalism. New York: Picador.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolk, A. (2005). Environmental reporting by multinationals from the Triad: Convergence or divergence? Management International Review, 45(1), 145–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korten, D. C. (1995). When corporations rule the world. West Hartford, CT: Kumarian Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamberton, G. (2005). Sustainable sufficiency: An internally consistent version of sustainability. Sustainable Development, 13, 53–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langton, C. G. (Ed.). (1989). Artificial life. Sante Fe Institute studies in the sciences of complexity. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laufer, W. S. (2003). Social accountability and corporate greenwashing. Journal of Business Ethics, 43, 253–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lave, L. (1962). An empirical approach to the prisoner’s dilemma game. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 76, 424–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (1995). Social systems. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maner, J. K., Richey, J. A., Cromer, K., & Mallott, M. (2007). Dispositional anxiety and risk-avoidant decision-making. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 665–675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maon, F., Lindgreen, F., & Swaen, V. (2009). Designing and implementing corporate social responsibility: An integrative framework grounded in theory and practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 87, 71–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1984). The new institutionalism: Organisational factors in political life. American Political Science Review, 78(3), 734–749.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(3), 268–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marwell, G., & Ames, R. E. (1981). Economists free ride, does anyone else? Experiments on the provision of public goods, IV. Journal of Public Economics, 15(3), 295–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2005). United Kingdom: An explicit model of business-society relations. In A. Habisch, J. Jonker, M. Wagner, & R. Schmidpeter (Eds.), Corporate social responsibility across Europe (pp. 51–66). Berlin: Springer.

    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, 404–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonough, W., & Braungart, M. (2002). Cradle to cradle: Remaking the way we make things. New York, NY: North Point Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MG, K. P. (2005). KPMG International survey of corporate responsibility reporting 2005. Amsterdam, NL: KPMG International.

    Google Scholar 

  • MG, K. P. (2008). KPMG International survey of corporate responsibility reporting 2008. Amsterdam, NL: KPMG International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milne, M., Kearins, K., & Walton, S. (2006). Business makes a ‘journey’ out of ‘sustainability’: Creating adventures in Wonderland? Organization, 13(6), 801–839.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. (1983). Structure in fives: Designing effective organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monsen, R. J., Chieu, J. S., & Cooley, D. E. (1968). The effect of separation of ownership and control on the performance of the large firm. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 82(3), 435–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morel, B., & Ramanujam, R. (1999). Through the looking glass of complexity: The dynamics of organization as adaptive and evolving systems. Organization Science, 10, 278–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mouawad, J., & Krauss, C. (2010, June 3). Another torrent BP works to stem: It’s CEO. New York Times.

  • Nemeth, C. P. (2005). Health care forensics. In Y. I. Noy & W. Karwowski (Eds.), Handbook of human factors in litigation. New York: CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newton, T. J. (2002). Creating the new ecological order? Elias and actor-network theory. Academy of Management Review, 27, 523–540.

    Google Scholar 

  • New York Times. (2011, October 3). The economic crisis and market upheavals. The New York Times.

  • Nikiforuk, A. (2008). Pandemonium: How globalization and trade are putting the world at risk. Brisbane: University of Queensland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norman, W., & MacDonald, C. (2004). Getting to the bottom of the triple bottom line. Business Ethics Quarterly, 14(2), 243–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okhuysen, G., & Bonardi, J. P. (2011). Editors’ comments: The challenges of building theory by combining lenses. Academy of Management Review, 36(1), 6–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, D. (1991). Privatisation ten years on: A critical analysis of its rationale and results. Working paper. Working and occasional paper series. Cranfield University, School of Management.

  • Pirson, M., & Lawrence, P. (2010). Humanism in business—Towards a paradigm shift? Journal of Business Ethics, 93(4), 553–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plowman, D. A., Solansky, S., Beck, T. E., Baker, L., Kulkarni, M., & Travis, D. V. (2007). The role of leadership in emergent, self-organisation. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(4), 341–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollard, D., Almond, R., Duncan, E., Gooten, M., Hadeed, L., Jeffries, B., & McLellan, R. (Eds.). (2010). Living planet report 2010. Switzerland: World Wide Fund for Nature Gland.

  • Porter, E. H. (1964). Manpower development: The system training concept. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, T., & Cordoba, J. (2009). Three views of systems theories and their implications for sustainability education. Journal of Management Education, 33, 23–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Purser, R. E., Park, C., & Montouri, A. (1995). Limits to anthropocentrism: Toward an ecocentric organisation paradigm? Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 1053–1089.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabin, M. (1998). Psychology and economics. Journal of Economic Literature, 36(1), 11–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reason, J. (1997). Managing the risks of organisational accidents. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reason, J. (2000). Human error: Models and management. British Medical Journal, 320, 768.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riaz, S. (2009). The global financial crisis: An institutional theory analysis. Critical Perspectives in International Business, 5, 26–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R. (2000). The usury debate, the sustainability debate, and the call for a moral economy. Ecological Economics, 35, 157–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rusinko, C., & Sama, L. (2009). Greening and sustainability across the management curriculum: An extended journey. Journal of Management Education, 33(3), 271–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senser, R. A. (2007). Corporate social responsibility: A fledgling movement faces a crucial test. Dissent, Winter, 77–82.

  • Sharma, S., & Henriques, I. (2005). Stakeholder influences on sustainability practices in the Canadian forest products industry. Strategic Management Journal, 26(2), 159–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shrivastava, P. (1995). Ecocentric management for a risk society. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 118–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. (1987). Behavioral economics. The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics, 1, 221–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, J. G., & Kahn, H. (Eds.). (1984). The resourceful earth: A response to global 2000. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P. (2002). One world: The ethics of globalisation. Melbourne: The Text Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. (1999, 1776). The wealth of nations IV–V. London: Penguin Classics.

  • Smith, A. (2011, April 6). New systems ratings puts a spotlight on ethics. Financial Times, 11.

  • Sovacool, B. K. (2010). Broken by design: The corporation as a failed technology. Science Technology and Society, 15(1), 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stacey, R. D. (2000). Complexity and management. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stacey, R. D., Griffin, D., & Shaw, P. (2000). Complexity and management: Fad or radical challenge to systems thinking? London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Starik, M., & Rands, G. P. (1995). Weaving an integrated web: Multilevel and multisystem perspectives of ecologically sustainable organisations. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 908–935.

    Google Scholar 

  • Starik, M., Rands, G., Marcus, A., & Clark, T. (2011). Sustainability in management education. Introduction. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 9(3), 377–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Starkey, K., & Crane, A. (2003). Toward green narrative: Management and the evolutionary epic. Academy of Management Review, 28, 220–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Staw, B. M., Sandelands, L. E., & Dutton, J. E. (1981). Threat rigidity effects in organizational behavior: A multilevel analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26(4), 501–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stern, G., & Feldman, R. (2004). Too big to fail. Washington, MA: The Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steurer, R., Langer, M., Konrad, A., & Martinuzzi, A. (2005). Corporations, stakeholders and sustainable development I: A theoretical exploration of business-society relations. Journal of Business Ethics, 61(3), 263–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, J. E. (2006). Globalization and its discontents. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, J. E. (2010). Freefall: America, free markets, and the sinking of the world economy. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(4481), 453–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R., & McKelvey, B. (2007). Complexity leadership theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(4), 298–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valente, M. (2010). Demystifying the struggles of private sector paradigmatic change: Business as an agent in a complex adaptive system. Business and Society, 49(3), 439–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Marrewijk, M., & Hardjono, T. (2003). European corporate sustainability framework for managing complexity and corporate transformation. Journal of Business Ethics, 44, 121–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaughan, D. (1996). The Challenger launch decision: Risky technology, culture, and deviance at NASA. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, D. J. (2005). Is there a market for virtue? The business case for corporate social responsibility. California Management Review, 47(4), 19–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. (2008). Building a new institutional infrastructure for corporate responsibility. Academy of Management Perspectives, 22, 87–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, H., & Smith, C. N. (2007). Corporate social responsibility at a crossroads? Business Strategy Review, 18(1), 16–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woller, G. (1996). Business ethics, society, and Adam Smith: Some observations on the liberal business ethos. Journal of Socio-Economics, 25(3), 311–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zerk, J. A. (2006). Multinationals and corporate social responsibility: Limitations and opportunities in international law. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. H., Lindberg, C., & Plsek, P. (1998). Edgeware: Insights from complexity science for health care leaders. Irving, TX: VHA.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Macquarie University, North Ryde, NSW, Australia

    L. Metcalf

  2. University of Technology, Sydney, Broadway, NSW, Australia

    S. Benn

Authors
  1. L. Metcalf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Benn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to L. Metcalf.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Metcalf, L., Benn, S. The Corporation is Ailing Social Technology: Creating a ‘Fit for Purpose’ Design for Sustainability. J Bus Ethics 111, 195–210 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1201-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1201-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation