Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 149, Issue 3, pp 535–560 | Cite as

Towards an Understanding of Social Responsibility Within the Church of England

  • Krystin Zigan
  • Alan Le Grys


This research explores the interplay of individual, organisational and institutional variables that produce the current pattern of social responsibility practices within a specific religious organisation, namely the Church of England. By combining elements primarily of neo-institutional theory with Bourdieu’s theory of practice, we construct a theoretical framework to examine the extent to which social responsibility activity is modified or informed by a distinctive faith perspective. Given that neo-institutional theory predicts a convergence of structures and practices between different organisations operating in the same institutional sector, this research draws on a single case study focusing on social responsibility activity in six different Church of England dioceses and shows that the opposite is actually the case: there is evidence of a significant degree of divergence in terms of organisational practice within the same institutional structure. Reasons for that were found to be the impact of human agency and loose institutional structures. This paper thus contributes to the understanding of social responsibility in religious organisations by exploring the dynamics between institutional pressures, organisational context and individual agents operating in the field of faith-based social responsibility. It thereby also contributes to neo-institutional theory.


Bourdieu Church of England Human agency Neo-institutional theory Social responsibility 


  1. Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. (2012). What we know and don’t know about corporate social responsibility: a review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 38(4), 932–968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alves, M., & Koga, N. (2006). Brazilian nonprofit organizations and the new legal framework: an institutional perspective. Brazilian Administration Review, 3(2), 68–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alvesson, M. (2003). Beyond neo-positivism, romanticism and localism. A reflexive approach to interviews. Academy of Management Review, 28(1), 13–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alvesson, M., & Skoldberg, K. (2008). Reflexive methodology: New vistas for qualitative research. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  5. Andreini, D., Pedeliento, G., & Signori, S. (2014). CSR and service quality in nonprofit organizations: the case of a performing arts association. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 19, 127–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Antoci, A., Galeotti, M., Russu, P., & Zarri, L. (2006). Generalized trust and sustainable coexistence between socially responsible firms and nonprofit organizations. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 29, 783–802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Archbishops’ Council. (2014). Short history of anglicanism. Church of England [Online]. Retrieved December 22, 2014 from
  8. Athanasopoulou, A. (2012). Managers’ corporate social responsibility perceptions and attitudes across different organizational contexts within the non-profit–for-profit organizational continuum. Journal of Change Management, 12(4), 467–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Avetisyan, E., & Ferrary, M. (2013). Dynamics of stakeholders’ implications in the institutionalization of the CSR field in France and in the United States. Journal of Business Ethics, 115(1), 115–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Avis, P. D. L. (2001). Church, state and establishment. London: SPCK.Google Scholar
  11. Banerjee, S. B. (2007). Corporate social responsibility: The good, the bad and the ugly. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Battilana, J. (2006). Agency and institutions: The enabling role of individuals’ social position. Organization, 13(5), 653–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Battilana, J., & D’Aunno, T. (2009). Institutional work and the paradox of embedded agency. In T. B. Lawrence, R. Suddaby, & B. Leca (Eds.), Actors and agency in institutional studies of organizations (pp. 31–58). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. BBC News. (2013). Church of England attendances ‘stabilising'. Available at: Accessed. 28 Jan 2015.
  15. Berger, P., & Luckmann, T. (1967). The social construction of reality. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  16. Bigoni, M., Deidda Gagliardo, E., & Funnell, W. (2013). Rethinking the sacred and secular divide- Accounting and accountability practices in the Diocese of Ferrara (1431–1457). Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 26(4), 567–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Bisesi, M., & Lidman, R. (2009). Compassion and power: Religion, spirituality, and public administration. International Journal of Public Administration, 32(1), 4–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Blowfield, M., & Frynas, J. G. (2005). Setting new agendas: critical perspectives on Corporate Social Responsibility in the developing world. International Affairs, 81, 499–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Bondy, K., Moon, J., & Matten, D. (2012). An institution of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in multi-national corporations (MNCs): Form and implications. Journal of Business Ethics, 111(2), 281–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Bouckaert, L., & Vandenhove, J. (1998). Business ethics and the management of non-profit institutions. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(9–10), 1073–1081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Bourdieu, P. (1988). Homo academicus. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  24. Bourdieu, P. (1996). The rules of art. Genesis and structure of the literary field. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Bourdieu, P. (1998). Practical reason. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Bourdieu, P. (2005). The social structures of the economy. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  27. Bradbury, H., & Lichtenstein, B. (2000). Relationality in organizational research: Exploring the space between. Organization Science, 11, 551–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Brammer, S., Williams, G., & Zinkin, J. (2007). Religion and attitudes to corporate social responsibility in a large cross-country sample. Journal of Business Ethics, 71(3), 229–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Brandsen, T. (2009). Civicness in organizations: A reflection on the relationship between professionals and managers. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 20(3), 260–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Calhoun, C. (2002). Dictionary of the social sciences. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Calkins, M. (2000). Recovering religion’s prophetic voice for business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 23, 339–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Campell, J. L. (2007). Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 946–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Church of England. (2015a). Retrieved May 22, 2015 from
  34. Church of England. (2015b). Mission. Retrieved September 12, 2015 from
  35. Church of England Record Centre. (2015). Board for social responsibility. London: Lambeth Palace Library.Google Scholar
  36. Claeye, F., & Jackson, T. (2012). The iron cage re-revisited: Institutional isomorphism in non-profit organisations in South Africa. Journal of International Development, 24(5), 602–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Cornelius, N., Todres, M., Janjuha-Jivraj, S., Woods, A., & Wallace, J. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and the social enterprise. Journal of Business Ethics, 81, 355–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Creswell, J. (2013). Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  40. Dar, S., & Cooke, B. (Eds.). (2008). The new development management. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
  41. Dart, R. (2004). Being “business-like” in a nonprofit organization: A grounded and inductive typology. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 33(2), 290–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Davies, M. (2013). Watch out, Wonga, warns Welby. Church Times, July 26th 2013. Retrieved January 30, 2015 from,-wonga,-warns-welby.
  43. Devinney, T. (2009). Is the socially responsible corporation a myth? The good, the bad, and the ugly of Corporate Social Responsibility. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(2), 44–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. DiMaggio, P. (1979). Review essay: on Pierre Bourdieu. American Journal of Sociology, 84(6), 1460–1474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. (1991). Introduction. In W. Powell & P. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 1–38). Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Dolnicar, S., Irvine, H., & Lazarevski, K. (2008). Mission or money? Competitive challenges facing public sector nonprofit organisations in an institutionalised environment. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 13, 107–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Drori, G. S., Meyer, J. W., & Hwang, H. (2006). Globalization and organization: World society and organizational change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Eikenberry, A. M. (2009). Refusing the market: A democratic discourse for voluntary and nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 38(4), 582–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Eikenberry, A. M., & Kluver, J. D. (2004). The marketization of the nonprofit sector: Civil society at risk? Public Administration Review, 64(2), 132–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Emirbayer, M. (1997). Manifesto for a relational sociology. American Journal of Sociology, 103(2), 281–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Emirbayer, M., & Mische, A. (1998). What is agency? American Journal of Sociology, 103(4), 962–1023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ferris, J. M. (1998). The role of the nonprofit sector in a self-governing society: A view from the United States. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 9(2), 137–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Fligstein, N. (2001). Social skill and the theory of fields. Sociological Theory, 19(2), 105–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Fowler, B. (1997). Pierre Bourdieu and cultural theory: Critical investigations. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  57. Galston, W. A. (2005). The practice of liberal pluralism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Gambling, T., & Karim, R. (1991). Business and accounting ethics in Islam. London: Mansell.Google Scholar
  59. Garriga, E., & Mele, D. (2004). Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory. Journal of Business Ethics, 53, 51–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Garud, R., Jain, S., & Kumaraswamy, A. (2002). Institutional entrepreneurship in the sponsorship of common technological standards: the case of Sun Microsystems and Java. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 196–214.Google Scholar
  61. Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  62. Geertz, C. (1983). Local knowledge. London: Fontana Press.Google Scholar
  63. Goddard, A. (2004). Budgetary practices and accountability habitus- A grounded theory. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 17(4), 543–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Greenwood, R., & Suddaby, R. (2006). Institutional entrepreneurship by elite firms in mature fields: The big five accounting firms. Academy of Management Journal, 49(1), 27–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Guardian. (2012). Justin Welby confirmed as next archbishop of Canterbury. Retrieved June 15, 2015 from
  66. Guest, M., Olson, E., & Wolfe, J. (2012). Christianity: Loss of monopoly. In L. Woodhead & R. Catto (Eds.), Religion and change in Modern Britain (pp. 57–78). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  67. Guiso, L., Sapienza, P., & Zingales, L. (2003). People’s opium? Religion and economic attitudes. Journal of Monetary Economics, 50(1), 225–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Hardy, L., & Ballis, H. (2005). Does one size fit all? The sacred and secular divide revisited with insights from Niebuhr’s typology of social action. Accounting, Accountability & Auditing Journal, 18(2), 238–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Haugh, R. (2003). Getting the attention of big pharma. Hospitals and Health Networks, 77(10), 44.Google Scholar
  70. Hensmans, M. (2003). Social movement organizations: a metaphor for strategic actors in institutional fields. Organization Studies, 24(3), 355–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Herman, R. D., & Renz, D. O. (1999). Theses on nonprofit organizational effectiveness. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 28(2), 107–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Hiilamo, H. (2012). Rethinking the role of church in a socio-democratic welfare state. International Journal of Sociology and Social policy, 32(7/8), 401–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Hogan, E. (2009). Does ‘Corporate’ responsibility apply to not-for-profit organizations? In S. O. Idowu & W. L. Filho (Eds.), Professionals’ perspectives of corporate social responsibility (pp. 271–288). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Hollenbach, D. (2002). The common good and christian ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Hui, L. T. (2008). Combining faith and CSR: A paradigm of corporate sustainability. International Journal of Social Economics, 35(6), 449–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Hwang, H., & Powell, W. W. (2009). The rationalization of charity: The influences of professionalism in the nonprofit sector. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54(2), 268–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Irvine, H. (2005). Balancing money and mission in a local church budget. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 18(2), 211–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Jacobs, K. (2005). The sacred and the secular: Examining the role of accounting in the religious context. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 18(2), 189–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Jensen, J., & Miszlivetz, F. (2006). Global civil society: From dissident discourse to World Bank parlance. In P. Wagner (Ed.), The languages of civil society (pp. 177–205). Oxford: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
  80. Johansen, T. S., & Nielsen, A. E. (2012). CSR in corporate self-storying: Legitimacy as a question of differentiation and conformity. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 17(4), 434–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Kotler, P., & Lee, N. (2005). Corporate social responsibility: Doing the most good for your company and your cause. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  82. Kreander, N., McPhail, K., & Molyneaux, D. (2005). God’s fund managers: A critical study of stock market investment practices of the Church of England and UK Methodists. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 17(3), 408–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Larsson, O. (2013). Convergence in ideas, divergence in actions organizational hypocrisy in nonprofit organizations. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 35(2), 271–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Lawrence, T. B. (1999). Institutional strategy. Journal of Management, 25, 161–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Lawrence, T. B., & Suddaby, R. (2006). Institutions and institutional work. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, T. B. Lawrence, & W. R. Nord (Eds.), Handbook of organization studies (pp. 215–254). Sage: London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Lawrence, T. B., Suddaby, R., & Leca, B. (2009). Introduction: Theorizing and studying institutional work. In T. B. Lawrence, R. Suddaby, & B. Leca (Eds.), Actors and agency in institutional studies of organizations (pp. 1–28). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Leca, B., Battilana, J., & Boxenbaum, E. (2008). Agency and institutions: a review of institutional entrepreneurship. Harvard business school working paper, 08-096. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  88. Lewis, D. (2007). The management of non-governmental development organisations (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  89. Lewis, D. (2008). Nongovernmentalism and the reorganization of public action. In S. Dar & B. Cooke (Eds.), The new development management (pp. 41–55). London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
  90. Longenecker, J. G., McKinney, J. A., & Moore, C. W. (2004). Religious intensity, evangelical Christianity, and business ethics: An empirical study. Journal of Business Ethics, 55(4), 373–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Louche, C., Arenas, D., & van Cranenburgh, K. (2012). From preaching to investing: Attitudes of religious organisations towards responsible investment. Journal of Business Ethics, 110(3), 301–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Lounsbury, M. (2008). Institutional rationality and practice variation: New directions in the institutional analysis of practice. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33(4–5), 349–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. MacCulloch, D. (2009). A history of Christianity: The first three thousand years. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
  94. Maier, F. (2011). Philanthropy and nonprofit leaders. Rise of the business model in philanthropy. In K. A. Agard (Ed.), Leadership in nonprofit organizations (pp. 484–490). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  95. Maier, F., Leitner, J., Meyer, M., & Millner, R. (2009). Managerialismus in Nonprofit Organisationen. Zur Untersuchung von Wirkungen und unerwünschten Nebenwirkungen. Kurswechsel, 4, 94–101.Google Scholar
  96. Maier, F., & Meyer, M. (2011). Managerialism and beyond: Discourses of civil society organization and their governance implications. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 22(4), 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Maignan, I., & Ferrell, O. (2003). Nature of corporate responsibilities: Perspectives from American, French, and German consumers. Journal of Business Research, 56(1), 55–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Meyer, J., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Meyer, J. W., & Scott, W. R. (1983). Organizational environments: Ritual and rationality. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  100. Moorman, (1980). History of the Church of England (3rd ed.). Harrisburg: Morehouse.Google Scholar
  101. Mutch, A. (2003). Communities of practice and habitus: A critique. Organization Studies, 24(3), 383–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. O’ Riordan, L., & Fairbrass, J. (2008). Corporate social responsibility (CSR): Models and theories in stakeholder dialogue. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(4), 745–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Okonkwo, B. (Ed.). (2013). Christian ethics and corporate culture: A critical view on corporate responsibilities-CSR, sustainability, ethics & governance. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  104. Otte, J. (2009). Virtuous enterprises: the place of Christian ethics. Finance & The Common Good/Bien Commun, 33(1), 87–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Pedersen, E. R., & Neergaard, P. (2009). What matters to managers? Management Decision, 47(8), 1261–1280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Pope Francis (2015). Laudate si’ Encyclical. Retrieved September 20, 2015 from
  107. Putnam, R. D. (2007). E pluribus unum: Diversity and community in the twenty-first century. The 2006 Johan Skytte Prize Lecture. Scandinavian Political Studies, 30(2), 137–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Raimi, L., Patel, A., Yekini, K., & Aljadani, A. (2013). Exploring the theological foundation of corporate social responsibility in Islam, Christianity and Judaism for strengthening compliance and reporting: An eclectic approach. Issues in Social and Environmental Accounting, 7(4), 228–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Ramanath, R. (2009). Limits to institutional isomorphism: examining internal processes in NGO–government interactions. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 38(1), 51–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Reay, T., Golden-Biddle, K., & Germann, K. (2006). Legitimizing a new role: Small wins and microprocesses of change. Academy of Management Journal, 49(5), 977–998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Rey, T. (2007). Bourdieu on religion: Imposing faith and legitimacy. Key thinkers in the study of religion. London: Equinox Pub.Google Scholar
  112. Riches, G. (2011). Thinking and acting outside the charitable food box: hunger and the right to food in rich societies. Development in Practice, 21(4–5), 768–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Roberts, S. M., Jones, J. P, I. I. I., & Fröhling, O. (2005). NGOs and the globalization of managerialism: A research framework. World Development, 33(11), 1845–1864.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Rousseau, S. (2008). Entreprises publiques et développement durable: Réflexion sur un engouement. Revue française de gestion, 185(5), 47–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Rusconi, G., & Signori, S. (2007). Responsabilità sociale e impresa non profit: quale declinazione? Impresa Sociale, 76, 40–58.Google Scholar
  116. Sahlin, K., & Wedlin, L. (2008). Circulating ideas: Imitation, translation and editing. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, K. Sahlin, & R. Suddaby (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 218–242). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2007). Research methods for business students (4th ed.). Pearson Education Ltd.: England.Google Scholar
  118. Scott, W. R. (2014). Institutions and organizations (4th ed.). Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  119. Sedgwick, P. (1999). The market economy and Christian ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Seitanidi, M. (2005). Corporate social responsibility and the non-commercial sector. What does corporate social responsibility mean for the non-commercial sector? And is it different from the CSR for businesses? New Academy Review, 3(4), 60–71.Google Scholar
  121. Sewell, W. H. (1992). A theory of structure: Duality, agency, and transformation. American Journal of Sociology, 98(1), 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Shoham, A., Ruvio, A., Vigoda-Gadot, E., & Schwabsky, N. (2006). Market orientations in the nonprofit and voluntary sector: A meta-analysis of their relationships with organizational performance. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35(3), 453–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Silverman, D. (2013). Doing qualitative research: A practical handbook (4th ed.). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  124. Smith, S. R., & Lipsky, M. (1998). Nonprofits for hire: The welfare state in the age of contracting (3rd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  125. Soltani, E., Syed, J., Liao, Y. Y., & Iqbal, A. (2014). Managerial mindsets toward corporate social responsibility: The case of auto industry in Iran. Journal of Business Ethics,. doi: 10.1007/s10551-014-2137-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Sparkes, R., & Cowton, C. J. (2004). The maturing of socially responsible investment: A review of the developing link with corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 52(1), 45–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Srinivas, N. (2009). Against NGOs? A critical perspective on nongovernmental action. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 38(4), 614–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  129. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  130. Suddaby, R., & Greenwood, R. (2005). Rhetorical strategies of legitimacy. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(1), 35–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. Tan, J. (2010). Grounded theory in practice: Issues and discussion for new qualitative researchers. Journal of Documentation, 66(1), 93–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Tolbert, P. S., & Zucker, L. G. (1983). Institutional sources of change in the formal structure of organizations: The diffusion of civil service reform 1880–1935. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(1), 22–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Torry, M. (2005). Managing God's business-religious and faith-based organizations and their management. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  134. Van Aaken, D., Splitter, V., & Seidl, D. (2013). Why do corporate actors engage in pro-social behaviour? A Bourdieusian perspective on corporate social responsibility. Organization, 20(3), 349–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Van Cranenburgh, K., Arenas, D., Goodman, J., & Louche, C. (2014). Religious organisations as investors: a Christian perspective on shareholder engagement. Society and Business Review, 9(2), 195–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. Van Maanen, J. (2011). Ethnography as work: Some rules of engagement. Journal of Management Studies, 48(1), 218–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Waters, R. D., & Ott, H. K. (2014). Corporate social responsibility and the nonprofit sector: Assessing the thoughts and practices across three nonprofit subsectors. Public Relations Journal, 8(3), 1–18.Google Scholar
  138. Weaver, G. R., & Agle, B. R. (2002). Religiosity and ethical behavior in organizations: A symbolic interactionist perspective. Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 77–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Woodhead, L., & Catto, R. (2012). Religion and change in modern Britain. Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  140. Worrall, B. (2004). The making of the modern Church (3rd ed.). London: SPCK.Google Scholar
  141. Ybema, S., Yanow, D., Wels, H., & Kamsteeg, F. (2009). Organizational ethnography: Studying the complexities of everyday life. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. Yin, R. (2014). Case study research-design and methods. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  143. Yin, J., & Zhang, Y. (2012). Institutional dynamics and corporate social responsibility (CSR) in an emerging country context: Evidence from China. Journal of Business Ethics, 111(2), 301–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Kent Business SchoolUniversity of KentChatham MaritimeUK
  2. 2.School of European Culture and LanguagesUniversity of KentCanterburyUK

Personalised recommendations