Search results

This paper aims to study the state of the art of corporate social responsibility (CSR) governance and operational structure within the most sustainable companies to arrive at a typology of CSR organization. Whether companies consider corporate social responsibility (CSR) a strategic management task is mirrored in the department and governance structure of CSR.

By conducting a web content analysis, the authors apply a “best practice” approach to examine the vertical and horizontal organization of CSR within the “most sustainable companies worldwide” (Robeco SAM, 2013).

The results show that most corporations have in place governance structures for CSR that organize it horizontally in stand-alone departments. Three types of CSR organization best practice emerged: the single-headed, two-headed and infused types.

The paper indicates three different ways that companies can organize CSR internally. The authors discuss the feasibility of such organization for large and small companies and their day-to-day business.

The paper addresses the under-researched area of vertical and horizontal CSR organization at the micro level. The authors analyze the state of the art of organizational and governance structures of CSR in the most sustainable companies and deduce three types of CSR governance and operational architecture.

Corporations have to increasingly include corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication by responding to public procurement tenders because of the recently revised Government Procurement Agreement (GPA) concluded by the World Trade Organization (WTO). The authors argue that procurement tenders are to be seen as part of corporate communications, particularly when aligned with CSR reporting and performance indicators as proposed by the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI). The recently published ISO 20400 on sustainable procurement lacks a clear usage indication of sustainability indicators (SIs). This paper aims to close this gap.

The paper performs a typological analysis of sustainability indicators in a sample of 665 currently used SIs. Furthermore, the paper conceptualizes a SIs selector for Sustainable Public Procurement (SPP) which is based on the typological analysis and acknowledges recent developments in the evolution of SIs.

The SIs typology results in three indicator types. The typology leads to the conceptualization of SI’s selector for sustainable public procurement. It enables professionals to build indicators for SPP considering the context of sustainability with impact valuations and allows scholars to advance research on measurement and decision-making.

To the authors’ best knowledge, this is the first introduction of procurement tender processes as part of corporate communications. Furthermore, the derived typology contributes an overview of existing SIs used in CSR communication. The paper contributes a self-responsible and pragmatic approach to CSR theory as private business self-regulation and a definition of SIs for corporate communications.

Sustainable public procurement (SPP) lacks common means for its operationalization within legislative latitudes. Through the translation of sustainability indicators (SIs) from CSR and corporate sustainability reporting into the needs of SPP, this paper aims to support the framing process of sustainability in public procurement. This paper does so along with the case of Switzerland.

This paper performs a typological analysis of well-established SIs from CSR reporting to propose a criteria framework for SPP. Second, this paper tests the framework’s usability and feasibility with an expert online survey conducted in the Swiss SPP landscape.

This paper proposes 10 generic criteria to frame the operationalization of SPP. Furthermore, public procurement experts from Switzerland evaluate the SPP framework as useful and feasible.

A limitation of the study can be seen in its deductive approach. Thus, it rather complements recent inductive approaches of SPP type and frame developments than replacing them. Future studies can further refine the understanding and operationalization of sustainability in public procurement.

The generic SPP criteria framework provides a common ground for the operationalization of SPP building on existing sustainability performance measurement knowledge and a frame to operationalize sustainability measurements for public tender processes.

Implementing sustainability in public procurement potentially changes market behaviors globally toward social equality and minimization of climate change impacts. This research aims to support the SPP implementation process.

To the best knowledge, this is the first attempt to directly translate established SIs from sustainability reporting into public procurement to frame SPP and to use existing sustainability measurement knowledge for its operationalization and harmonization.

The purpose of this paper is to add to a better understanding of relationship of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate philanthropy. The authors argue that corporate philanthropy is exclusive to CSR because of their different characteristics.

This paper is based on a profound literature review and discusses the relationship of CSR and corporate philanthropy from a theoretical point of view. By conceptually combining the CSR pyramid and the triple bottom line approach, the authors show that corporate philanthropy has a special role outside of the classical CSR concept.

Four fundaments of corporate philanthropy – economic, motivational, creative and moral – are described that illustrate the importance and outstanding role of corporate philanthropy for today’s businesses. Based on these, the authors formulate three new forms of corporate giving, volunteering and foundations, which the authors subsume under the novel notion of “exclusive corporate philanthropy”.

The main contribution of this paper for future research is to regard corporate philanthropy as exclusive to CSR. Future studies might, therefore, consider the different characteristics of corporate philanthropy and engage in an empirical investigation of this new type.

The model of exclusive corporate philanthropy presented in this paper provides practitioners with a better understanding of how corporate philanthropy can be rolled out today.

This paper offers a new perspective on the relationship of CSR and corporate philanthropy. Based on the economic, motivational, creative and moral characteristics of corporate philanthropy, the authors establish a clear distinction between the two concepts.

This paper aims to outline how destructive communication exemplified by ransomware cyberattacks destroys the process of organization, causes a “state of exception,” and thus constitutes organization. The authors build on Agamben's state of exception and translate it into communicative constitution of organization (CCO) theory.

A significant increase of cyberattacks have impacted organizations in recent times and laid organizations under siege. This conceptual research builds on illustrative cases chosen by positive deviance case selection (PDCS) of ransomware attacks.

CCO theory focuses mainly on ordering characteristics of communication. The authors aim to complement this view with a perspective on destructive communication that destroys the process of organization. Based on illustrative cases, the authors conceptualize a process model of destructive CCO.

The authors expand thoughts about a digital “corporate immune system” to question current offensive cybersecurity strategies of deterrence and promote resilience approaches instead.

Informed by destructive communication of cyberattacks, this theory advancement supports arguments to include notions of disorder into CCO theory. Furthermore, the paper explains where disruptions like cyberattacks may trigger sensemaking and change to preserve stability. Finally, a novel definition of ‘destructive CCO’ is provided: Destructive Communication Constitutes Organization by disrupting and destroying its site and surface while triggering sensemaking and becoming part of sensemaking itself.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the status of non-financial reporting according to the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) 3.1 A+ standard. By examining the comprehensiveness of the GRI performance in corporate non-financial reports classified as A+ the authors challenge the external assurance system imposed by GRI 3.1 A+ and discuss future directions for the application of GRI 4.0, particularly with regard to the standardized corporate reporting software language XBRL.

The authors applied a three-step-research design based on four literature-derived hypothesis and examined all 177 GRI 3.1 A+ reports (2012-13) by coding along 41 variables plus the 84 performance indicators of GRI 3.1 to test accessibility, ability to download, achievability, and the possibility to compare them to older reports.

The results indicate a lack of completeness of GRI’s 3.1 key performance indicators in A+ assured reports, that is made possible due to the reporting flexibility and voluntariness of the guideline. The authors find that the average of disclosed core indicators is 77.66 percent. Single A+ reports disclose even fewer GRI core indicators that B+ reports, which challenges the validity of the assurance system of GRI 3.1.

In this study the (core) indicators were taken as given by GRI 3.1; the quality of the indicators was not measured or weighted.

Implications may emerge for redesigning non-financial reporting guidelines.

By critically indicating possible weaknesses of the GRI 3.1 guidelines the authors aim to contribute to a more transparent and effective non-financial reporting.

As an increasing number of contributions criticize the credibility of non-financial reporting and also GRI’s role, the research for the first time provides empirical evidence of the shortcomings of CSR and sustainability reporting regarding comprehensiveness, accessibility, and comparability.

In this chapter, we introduce the history of critical thinking briefly, starting from Socrates to contemporary contributions. Based on this history, we derive several modules for training in critical thinking via practical exercises in critical thinking. Three classic critical thinking models are introduced: Socratic questioning method, Cartesian doubting method, and Baconian empirical method. We discuss their potential for critical thinking as foundational methods. The material in this chapter is distributed in three parts. In Part I, we provide a brief history of critical thinking. In Part II, we design models of critical thinking based on its classic history. In Part III, we list some models of critical thinking based on its history, from the Renaissance period to the current times. In the last section, we also discuss critical thinking in the context of business ethics, by delineating its normative domain, assessing its characteristics, and reviewing its processes.

This chapter aims to develop an institutionalist concept of faith based on Williamson's concept of ‘institutional trust’ and Coleman's contribution to ‘placement of trust’. As a starting point, it considers the social capital literature on trust from the perspective of institutional economics and economic anthropology. ‘Institutional faith’ posits as a normative state the inevitability of trust with regard to certain questions human beings cannot answer. This has a behaviour-channelling effect which makes, e.g. for institutional stability. The proposed concept is evaluated critically by contrasting it with T. Kuran's concept of ‘preference falsification’ in the Hindu caste system. Finally, the concept is challenged by today's Hindu fundamentalism and makes a differentiation between fundamentalism and institutional faith.

Academic work on responsible leadership has emphasised two aspects: the value orientation of leaders, and the scope of interests they consider in their leadership – the range of stakeholders, current and future, human and non-human. I address these via two questions that are equally important but different in scale: one is about the motives for individual action and the other about the coordination of multiple organisations. Possible answers are considered in the context of leadership development: the developmental pathways, and the structure of leader and leadership development programmes, that are most likely to promote responsible leadership.

On the question of moral motivation (drawing on the work of Paul Ricoeur) I suggest four influential factors: witnessing the suffering of others, admonitions of “masters of justice”, welfare of loved ones, and networks within which to discuss these matters. These I summarise as “the echo of conscience”.

On the question of coordinated change at a systemic level, I review several approaches commonly found in leadership development programmes, interpret these as emerging from four “logics” and consider the implications for responsible leader development. The four logics are: systems are so complex that entrepreneurial innovation is a primary mode of responsible leadership; specific issues might be resolved by bringing “the system in the room”; sector-specific organising to change the rules of the game towards greater social responsibility; identifying “positive tipping points” and seeking triggers for change.

I conclude with a meditation on idealism in responsible leadership.