Search results

There are no management decisions deprived of ethical or political consequences. Political corporate social responsibility (CSR) has been highlighting this assertion but research at the microlevel on this topic is scarce. This study aims to contribute to the microlevel research by proposing a behavioral framework where leaders’ political skills are determinants of engagement in strategic CSR and perceived CSR leverages their ascribed legitimacy to perform a political role outside the boundaries of the organizations.

Building upon political CSR and critical realism theories, this study offers a general review on key political CSR microlevel concepts and examines multiple dimensions of CSR to explain the indirect effect between boards' political skills and political legitimacy.

This research suggests that high politically skilled leaders are associated to more CSR adoption which fosters higher legitimacy to act as political influencers. Among these, CSR activities directed toward community members and employees are seemingly the most successful from a political standpoint.

This study proposes a contemporary form of political influence to business leaders that, in contrast with other strategies such as lobbying or financing political campaigns, does not end up damaging corporate image and reputation. Also, this study proposes that not all CSR activities leverage corporate political legitimacy per se, therefore they do need to be differentiated. This study then offers a comprehensive future research agenda, including detailed suggestions for research designs and measurements.

Managers’ work is surrounded by complex environments, from which they need to learn, in order to understand them. However, complexity poses several challenges to managerial learning, for which usually management educational programs have not prepared managers. Thus, the purpose of this paper is to explore such challenges and possible ways to overcome them.

This is a conceptual paper that explores in depth the issue of managerial learning challenges in a complex world. Managers face these challenges during their practice, yet sometimes management education has not prepared them for this.

Three managerial learning challenges due to complexity are identified. First, through cognition and cognitive structures, managers simplify the world around them. Nevertheless, biases, inertia and inaccuracy emerge, as managers’ mental models are not truly capable of capturing complexity. Second, managers look for information to aid them in their learning processes, but the information they gather is sometimes bogus, invalid or unfounded. Third, managers could seek for support from management research to improve their learning. However, given management research intricacies, limitations and particularities, a learning challenge emerges as well, as management research has been rarely capable to capture complexity.

Having explored these managerial learning challenges due to complexity, this paper discusses a carefulness-based management learning ideal, which by being underpinned by the quality of carefulness and the related concepts of critical thinking, negative capability and a deep learning style, suggests a potential new way to approach management learning in light of complexity.

In Paris, in 2015, 195 countries agreed to limit the emission of CO₂. The German Energiewende is an example of the types of regulatory changes that countries will need to enact to meet their Paris commitments. The Energiewende saw the German Government forcefully shift the energy base from non-renewable to renewable sources to reduce CO₂ emissions, and the effect of this was to reduce the market value of some German energy firms by as much as 70%. This paper aims to consider the strategic options available to energy incumbents facing the sort of regulatory challenges implied by the Paris agreement.

This paper is a literature review and a thought experiment, in which, 12 fields of strategy research are reviewed, and using the insights obtained from these fields, four strategic options are proposed for the energy incumbents, namely, “fight,” “flight,” “fit” and “follow.” Each strategy is introduced and evaluated, and, by looking at examples from other industries, the viability of that strategy for the energy industry is concluded.

Of the four strategies identified – that is, fight (lobbying), flight (internationalization or diversification), follow (imitation) or fit (adopt a core competencies perspective that re-imagines the firm) – it was concluded that only the last is feasible. The present review, and the application of the discussion to the energy industry, suggests that “fight” is viable only in the short term as a delaying strategy; “flight” is a value-destroying strategy, and, therefore not a real option for the energy industry; “follow” will lead the energy incumbents to lose their current positions of power; and only “fit” will allow the energy incumbents to remain viable in the long term.

All research has its limitations. The main limitation of this research is the fact that this study is a thought experiment based on a literature review. The suggested strategies are forward-looking, but are based on historical examples, and are intended to guide the energy incumbents, even when they are based on non-energy examples. The reader should view this paper in that light.

The practical implication of this research is that, of the 12 fields of strategy that it reviews, there is only one feasible strategy for the energy incumbents looking to survive the sorts of regulatory challenges implied by the Energiewende and the Paris agreement. The research suggests that many/most/all of the energy incumbents will, at first, choose a “fight” strategy, but in the long term only those that choose for a “fit” strategy will survive the sort of disruptions implied by these regulatory changes.

The social implications of this research are that many/most/all firms in the affected industry will go through a predictable process, of first resisting the change, before eventually supporting it; that “flight” is not a viable strategy; and that radical innovation rarely comes from incumbents. Policymakers should be aware of these facts when not only working with incumbents to develop the regulations necessary to meet the Paris climate commitments but also looking at the impacts of regulation and when trying to “pick winners.”

The paper reviews the existing literature, and the review is not new. The application to a specific industry and the advice gleaned from this for managers and policymakers is new and of high value.