Search results

As the Academy for Business in Society considers the theme “Business in Society: Measuring Impact and Creating Change,” one fundamental question emerges and that is how to collaborate with universities to create positive impact and sustainable business models. The purpose of this paper is to address that question and offer one apt illustration for how to collaborate effectively across sectors.

This paper offers a case study of the Honey Bee Initiative (HBI) from George Mason University’s School of Business.

In this case study, the authors discuss the Initiative’s tri-sector domestic and global partnerships, community-driven development approach and innovative solutions as an exemplar of business as a force for good.

This paper provides unique insight into how universities can partner with non-profits, business and policy leaders to effect positive change. As such, the HBI program contributes to the growing body of research on the benefits of tri-sector partnership models as a means of addressing global goals and provides a valuable case study to understand better the necessity of multi-stakeholder partnerships. Moreover, the HBI’s tri-sector partnership model offers important insights into what makes these partnerships successful and serves as a replicable model that can be instituted in other regions around the globe.

Based on the theoretical background of stakeholder capitalism, the purpose of this paper is to contribute to the scientific debate on the topic of public–private partnerships (PPPs), considering in particular how this governance structure relates to the pursuit of sustainable development. Specifically, this objective will be pursued with a focus on stakeholder relations and governance aspects, to highlight enablers and barriers in change for sustainability.

The systematic literature review is applied starting with the use of keywords in Web of Science, which leads to the extrapolation of 629 articles on the topic of “PPP and sustainability”. Subsequently, through various skimming steps, 75 papers are sampled. A mixed (quantitative-qualitative) approach is then followed: a co-word semantic network to identify the pattern of discourse and a more in-depth and explanatory analysis of the papers. These quantitative and qualitative tools synergistically work together to evidence the main aspects related to the aim of the paper.

With reference to the governance structure and stakeholders of PPPs, the analyses highlight the shift towards a triadic type of relational governance that considers stakeholders (especially the community) in addition to public–private partners. This can improve the partnership's performance (particularly in sustainable development) and social legitimacy. With reference to the role of PPPs in the implementation of sustainable development, they have positive potential in terms of implementing sustainability and raising stakeholder awareness of it. Nevertheless, PPPs may entail risks to the implementation of sustainability. The findings lead to some concluding remarks on future research opportunities.

The research leads to some managerial implications, such as the need to follow a competitive collaboration approach among stakeholders, to develop relational governance skills and related managerial tools and to incorporate sustainability aspects starting from the design of PPPs.

The originality aspect of this research is the consideration of a PPP by relating it to the pursuit of sustainability. Such an inter-organizational structure could be suitable to deal with the complexity inherent in the implementation of sustainability and is peculiar in terms of governance and stakeholder relations, considering that it is characterised by the presence of several partners of different nature (public and private).

The paper examines the key driving factors behind the rapid and uneven growth of social enterprises in China based on Kerlin’s Macro-Institutional Social Enterprise (MISE) model of social enterprise development, with an emphasis on testing key local institutional factors.

The study adopts the quantitative method approach. The hypotheses have been tested based on a cross-regional empirical analysis with two national datasets on China.

This study shows that among the state, market and civil society, local government support in terms of favorable policies is the sole determinant factor driving China’s social enterprise growth. On the other hand, the market is irrelevant and local civil society impedes social enterprise growth. This demonstrates that the current growth model is the result of government intervention.

The datasets have a limited sample size. We suggest that future studies may collect a larger sample size with more comprehensive information. We think this study will encourage more comparative qualitative studies at the local level to reveal the underlying mechanisms of growth.

Since government policy is the determinant factor, the quality and quantity of government-backed incubation programs and platforms would matter the most for social enterprise growth. Our study also helps social entrepreneurs understand what factors matter when they try to develop social enterprises in China. They are advised to work on aspects of gaining legal legitimacy and political support in order to grow the sector.

This conclusion suggests that professionals and practitioners should review the implications of the current growth of social enterprises in China, in terms of their sustainability, given their institutional isolation from other sectors.

Current studies have yet to thoroughly explore the role of meso- and micro-institutional factors in social enterprise development, especially in different contexts. With reference to Kerlin’s framework and the tri-sector model, this paper advances the understanding of social enterprise growth in China.

The paper surveys selected standpoints in the Polish humanities that are visibly critical toward neoliberal assumptions and claims of economics. The resources used in the text are: Andrzej Szahaj’s philosophical postulates and assertions; Tadeusz Kowalik’s view; criticism and postulates of social economics articulated by the quarterly magazine Nowy Obywatel (The New Citizen). The purpose of this paper is to construct a possibly cohesive picture of this type of criticism by indicating important similarities between the approaches mentioned above, its strongest arguments, philosophical premises and political inclinations.

A conceptual synthesis and interpretation of theoretical standpoints and its philosophical premises, a comparative analysis of the text/content of the magazine (The New Citizen).

Each of the three standpoints discussed in the paper proves to be an interesting example of social economics. It is also symptomatic that they share a similar, critical attitude toward the way in which the transformation of the Polish economy from a socialist to a capitalist system had been carried out. The transformation is thereby interpreted as a process that is not accomplished at all from the point of view of the ideals of social justice and integrity.

The popularization of Polish normative views of economics taking into account the problem of social justice, and the possible transformation of the way in which economic problems are publicly understood in Poland.

The discussion of non-standard interpretations of Polish transformation and its effects that undermine and challenge neoliberal ideology in economics.

The field of Organization Development and Change (ODC) is facing the same tensions as those confronting humanity more broadly: how to build a sustainable future. There is an urgent need to preserve the viability of our species by changing our relationship to the natural environment and slowing the ravages of climate change and the degradation of the earth's resources. Simultaneously, technology advances are changing our lives, work, institutions, and culture in unpredictable ways. Social upheaval and geopolitical tensions are exposing deep fissures in values, preferences, and beliefs about what constitutes a just society and how to govern. The development needed for a sustainable future must enable us to operate in ways that are fundamentally different from the status quo – not just increase our effectiveness in the way we currently operate.

ODC will have to recontextualize its methodologies and frameworks that currently focus primarily on individual organizations to deal with the complexity and urgency of the challenges humanity is facing. In this Reflection, we consider some of the tensions and key questions that ODC faces: What does, and might, sustainable development mean in a globally intertwined world where divisions at both the macro and micro levels reflect conflicting interests, tensions, and fundamentally different aspirations for the future? How do ODC methodologies and frameworks need to change to help develop sustainable ecosystem level transformation cutting across hierarchies, institutions, geographies, and cultures? How does ODC need to design itself to operate differently with different outcomes? We suggest some possible next steps forward in addressing these tensions.

In recent times the government has emerged as an enabling and empowering facilitator promoting the adoption of corporate social responsibility (CSR) by businesses to leverage economic competitiveness and growth. India provides a unique context to explore the mandated role of government in relation to CSR specifically within the context of understanding its effective use to resolve grand challenges which the country is facing at present. Grand challenges are complex social, economic and environmental problems which require innovative and collaborative solutions. In this chapter we explore extant secondary data, related to CSR and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to examine whether mandatory CSR implementation which has been unfolding in India over the last few years has been effective in addressing India's grand challenges. Specifically, it focuses on the role of the Indian government, at the national and state levels, in directing CSR activities towards the SDGs.

The purpose of this paper is to systematically review the academic literature on non-governmental organizations’ (NGOs) role in sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) to develop a conceptual framework.

This paper conducts a systematic literature review through an analysis of 47 papers identified from peer-reviewed academic journals published from 2002 to 2020.

Adopting social movement theory and based on thematic findings, this paper proposes four steps and six propositions in the process of NGOs fostering SSCM. These include relative deprivation, political opportunities, resource mobilization and collective action, based on which we developed a conceptual framework regarding the role of NGOs in improving sustainability in supply chains. The proposed conceptual model opens a new avenue of research in NGO literature and several directions for further research.

This study may be the first to provide a systematic review of NGOs’ role in improving sustainability in supply chains. Moreover, by borrowing the social movement theory from sociology, this paper able to propose a new conceptual framework with a research agenda so as to deepen the understanding of the phenomenon and provide directions for future research.