Threat Interpretation and Innovation in the Context of Climate Change: An Ethical Perspective
- 827 Downloads
The ability of managers to identify and interpret challenges in the external environment is one of the micro-foundations of dynamic capabilities. The underlying literature on strategic issue interpretation suggests that interpreting environmental challenges as opportunities rather than threats is more likely to lead to proactive and innovative responses, but there are also potentially positive effects of threat interpretation, for instance high levels of commitment and risk-seeking behaviour. In this paper, I use the context of climate change to explore the link between threat interpretation and innovation in more detail. I use exploratory cluster analysis and illustrative case studies to develop a set of propositions to explain when threat interpretation can in fact encourage innovation. I identify two ethical mechanisms that positively mediate the relationship between threat interpretation and innovation: enlarged concept of responsibility to society and moral legitimacy. The paper contributes to the literature by identifying the importance of ethics in linking managerial interpretation to innovation, particularly in the context of global environmental and social challenges.
KeywordsInnovation Environmental strategy Managerial interpretation Dynamic capabilities
The author would like to thank Michael Pollitt and the entire Energy Policy Research Group at the University of Cambridge for their support in developing this research. The author is also grateful for construtive feedback from Volker Hoffmann and the SusTec team, as well as the anonymous reviewers, on previous versions of the article.
- 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
- Chatterji, A. K., & Toffel, M. W. (2010). How firms respond to being rated. Strategic Management Journal, 31(9), 917–945.Google Scholar
- Daft, R. L., & Weick, K. E. (1984). Toward a model of organizations as interpretation systems. Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 284–295.Google Scholar
- Dutton, J. E., & Jackson, S. E. (1987). Categorizing strategic issues: Links to organizational action, 12(1), 76–90.Google Scholar
- Everitt, B., Landau, S., Leese, M., & Stahl, D. (2011). Cluster analysis (5th ed.). Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Furrer, B., Hamprecht, J., & Hoffmann, V. H. (2012). Much ado about nothing? How banks respond to climate change. Business & Society, 51(1), 62–88.Google Scholar
- George, E., Chattopadhyay, P., Sitkin, S. B., & Barden, J. (2006). Cognitive underpinnings of institutional persistence and change: A framing perspective. Academy of Management Review, 31(2), 347–365.Google Scholar
- Hart, S. L. (1995). A natural-resource-based view of the firm. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 986–1014.Google Scholar
- Lavie, D. (2006). Capability reconfiguration: An analysis of incumbent responses to technological change. Academy of Management Review, 31(1), 153–174.Google Scholar
- Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Okereke, C., Wittneben, B., & Bowen, F. (2012). Climate change: Challenging business, transforming politics. Business & Society, 51(1), 7–30.Google Scholar
- Pennebaker, J. W., Chung, C. K., Ireland, M., Gonzales, A., & Booth, R. J. (2007). The development and psychometric properties of LIWC2007. Austin, TX: LIWC.net.Google Scholar
- Reid, E. M., & Toffel, M. W. (2009). Responding to public and private politics: Corporate disclosure of climate change strategies. Strategic Management Journal, 30(11), 1157–1178.Google Scholar
- Saldana, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (1st ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Santana, V., Vaccaro, A., & Wood, D. J. (2009). Ethics and the networked business. Journal of Business Ethics, 90(4), 661–681.Google Scholar
- Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610.Google Scholar
- Starik, M., & Marcus, A. A. (2000). Introduction to the special research forum on the management of organizations in the natural environment: A field emerging from multiple paths, with many challenges ahead. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 539–547.Google Scholar
- Trucost. (2011). Trucost methodology overview: Measuring company environmental impacts. Retrieved from http://www.trucost.com. Accessed 15 May 2013.
- Young, I. M. (2008). Responsibility and global justice: A social connection model. In A. G. Scherer & G. Palazzo (Eds.), Handbook of research on global corporate citizenship (pp. 137–165). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar