Unsustainability of Sustainability: Cognitive Frames and Tensions in Bottom of the Pyramid Projects
- 365 Downloads
Existing research posits that decision makers use specific cognitive frames to manage tensions in sustainability. However, we know less about how the cognitive frames of individuals at different levels in organization interact and what these interactions imply for managing sustainability tensions, such as in Bottom of the Pyramid (BOP) projects. To address this omission, we ask do organizational and project leaders differ in their understanding of tensions in a BOP project, and if so, how? We answer this question by drawing on a 5-year study of a BOP project of a global pharmaceutical company in India. In line with the existing research, we found three kinds of frames—paradoxical, business case, and business—held differently across organizational levels and over time. We also found that the shift in frames of both project and organizational leaders was mediated by the decision-making horizon. The initial divergence across organizational levels, seen in paradoxical and business frames, was mediated by long-term decision-making horizon. However, there was an eventual convergence toward business frames associated with the shift from long- to shorter-term decision-making horizons and one that led to the project’s closure. We contribute by proposing a dynamic model of cognitive frames in sustainability, where the research has either alluded to top-down or bottom-up understanding.
KeywordsBottom of Pyramid Paradox Sustainability Decision-making horizons
- Ancona, D. G., Goodman, P. S., Lawrence, B. S., & Tushman, M. L. (2001). Time: a new research lens. The Academy of Management Review, 26(4), 645.Google Scholar
- Blount, S., & Janicik, G. A. (2001). When plans change: Examining how people evaluate timing changes in work organizations. The Academy of Management Review, 26(4), 566.Google Scholar
- CII-PWC. (2010). India Pharma Inc.: Capitalising on India’s Growth Potential. Confederation of Indian Industries- PricewaterhouseCoopers. http://www.pwc.com/en_IN/in/assets/pdfs/publications-2011/PwC_CII_pharma_Summit_Report_22Nov.pdf.
- Davidson, K. (2009). Ethical concerns at the bottom of the pyramid: Where CSR meets BOP. Journal of International Business Ethics, 2(1), 22.Google Scholar
- Government of India. (2001). Census of India 2001. http://www.censusindia.gov.in/Census_Data_2001/India_at_glance/rural.aspx.
- Gunther, M. (2014). The base of the pyramid: Will selling to the poor pay off? The Guardian. May 22.Google Scholar
- Harjula, L. (2007). Tensions between venture capitalists’ and business-social entrepreneurs’ goals: Will bottom-of-the-pyramid strategies offer a solution? Greener Management International, 51, 79–88.Google Scholar
- Hart, S. L., & London, T. (2005). Developing native capability. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 3(2), 28–33.Google Scholar
- Laverty, K. J. (1996). Economic “short-termism”: The debate, the unresolved issues, and the implications for management practice and research. Academy of Management Review, 21(3), 825–860.Google Scholar
- Lewis, M. W. (2000). Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide. The Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 760.Google Scholar
- Paull, M., Boudville, I., & Sitlington, H. (2013). Using sensemaking as a diagnostic tool in the analysis of qualitative data. The Qualitative Report, 18(27), 1.Google Scholar
- Prahalad, C. K., & Hart, S. L. (2002). The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid. Strategy + Business, 26, 1–14.Google Scholar
- Simanis, E., & Duke, D. (2014). Profits at the bottom of the pyramid. Harvard Business Review, 2014, 94–105.Google Scholar
- Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 381–403.Google Scholar
- Taylor, S. J., DeVault, M., & Bogdan, R. (2016). Introduction to qualitative research methods: A guidebook and resource. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Waller, M. J., Conte, J. M., Gibson, C. B., & Carpenter, M. A. (2001). The effect of individual perceptions of deadlines on team performance. The Academy of Management Review, 26(4), 586.Google Scholar
- Zietsma, C., & Vertinsky, I. (2002). Shades of green: Cognitive framing and the dynamics of corporate environmental response. Journal of Business Administration and Policy Analysis, 27, 261–292.Google Scholar