Search results

Discussions about sustainability in the organizational context present a blind spot. It appears when we ask if a company recognized as sustainable, keep what it means compatible with corporate sustainability premises and its values on the strategic decision process. In this context, the purpose of this paper is, on the light of sensemaking and the decision-making theory, to reflect on possible divergences between meanings attributed to sustainability, available on official documents, and the meanings identified in current actions and narratives related to sustainability goals in the researched organization.

The research adopted a qualitative approach, characterized as descriptive, using as methods narrative analysis and documentary research, that were carried out from sensemaking theory.

It was identified coherence between strategic statements and present sustainable actions. However, in view of theoretical reference used, it was identified an imprecision in sustainability perspectives of decision making. Inconsistency tends to promote internal resistance, difficulty to commit to all areas and prejudice long-term results.

Future studies should compare the decision-making meaning attributed to sustainability in companies of different market segments.

The studied case shed light on the importance of managers having at their disposal a map that relates strategic objectives and actions aimed at sustainability. The lack of this compromises the organizational results focused on corporate sustainability.

The understanding of the meanings attributed gives rise to perceptions of possible and relevant flaws in the alignment between the discourse and the practice of sustainability, supporting possibilities of the fine adjustments in strategic decision making.

Inspired by objective hermeneutics (Oevermann, 1984, 1996, 1999; Oevermann et al., 1979; Weller, 2010; Wohrab-Sahr, 2003) and qualitative validation (Adcock and Collier, 2001; Martis, 2006; Maxwell, 1992), the authors present this essay with the aim of proposing an objective hermeneutic approach to qualitative validation.

In order to develop this approach, the authors consider the contributions of Martis (2006) and Maxwell (1992) about theoretical–empirical validity, Adcock and Collier's propositions (2001) regarding the conceptualization and evaluation of phenomena through specific levels, tasks and stages of validation and the principles of objective hermeneutic interpretation proposed by Wohlrab-Sahr (2003).

Three main contributions are considered: theoretical–empirical validity (Martis, 2006; Maxwell, 1992); levels of validation – theoretical framework, systematized concept, indicators and results (Adcock and Collier, 2001); stages of validation – content validity, convergent validity and nomological validity (Adcock and Collier, 2001); and principles of objective hermeneutic interpretation – sequential interpretation, mental–experimental explanation of possible interpretations, preservation rule, literal character of interpretation, totality, reflection about knowledge used in the analysis and group of interpreters (Wohrab-Sahr, 2003). These contributions were related to establishing a framework that illustrates the proposed objective hermeneutic approach to qualitative validation.

The authors intend to offer to the scope of organization studies an alternative for validation, so that the voices of the researched can be heard. Furthermore, the authors seek to guide researchers as to how to respect and protect what is heard, in order to avoid any invasion of others' discourse.

The purpose of this paper is to identify and discuss human competences required for sustainability management in organisations.

The research is based on a systematic review of the literature, through qualitative thematic analysis.

The research covered 15 years of scientific publications and was summarised in 43 articles. It revealed that education, more than management, was the field of knowledge with more references in human competences, through exploratory methodological approaches. The competences found were plenty, but there is still some misunderstanding regarding their conceptual and theoretical bases.

This research provides evidence that the academic knowledge on the subject is still at its initial stage, and it exposes the debility of the management area in addressing the subject.

The authors intend to indicate to managers some fundamentals for the adoption of human competences for sustainability aiming at a more sustainable performance in organisations.

The results may instigate studies concerning the fit of sustainability competences developed on higher education institutions and the job market. From it, curricula and pedagogical projects can be proposed and revised with better alignment to the organisational context.

This paper presents a theoretical contribution by building bridges among different perspectives and fields of knowledge on the topic. The paper also offers a managerial contribution by stimulating practical discussions to develop sustainability in organisations through individuals.

The purpose of this paper is to characterize sustainable development and sustainability as study objects for comparative management theory.

The primary objective of this paper is to characterize sustainable development and sustainability as study objects for comparative management theory.

Analytical dimensions were related to establishing three proposals, which represent possible theoretical routes for characterizing sustainable development and sustainability as study objects for comparative management theory. A framework which illustrates the theoretical route taken to develop these proposals is presented at the end of the theoretical-analytical discussions.

This paper considers that discussion about sustainable development, sustainability and comparative management theory, as interesting themes for organizational studies, lack epistemological clarity and theoretical depth. Such shortcomings are identified based upon the difficulty in identifying ontological postures, epistemological perspectives, dominant paradigms and conceptual approaches that enable greater coherence to analysis of these themes, and also support the undertaking of research that can contribute to enriching proposals related to comparative management theory.

This is an innovative paper as it relates comparative management theory approaches with structural concepts from sustainable development and sustainability developed using contributions from organizational theories, sociological reflections, and political science. The proposed characterization is intended to blaze new and alternative epistemological paths for adding greater rigor to empirical research focussed on the relationship investigated here in a theoretical context.

We present a critical literature review debating Brazilian research on social and environmental accounting (SEA). The aim of this study is to understand the role of politics in the construction of hegemonies in SEA research in Brazil. In particular, we examine the role of hegemony in relation to the co-option of SEA literature and sustainability in the Brazilian context by the logic of development for economic growth in emerging economies. The methodological approach adopts a post-structural perspective that reflects Laclau and Mouffe’s discourse theory. The study employs a hermeneutical, rhetorical approach to understand and classify 352 Brazilian research articles on SEA. We employ Brown and Fraser’s (2006) categorizations of SEA literature to help in our analysis: the business case, the stakeholder–accountability approach, and the critical case. We argue that the business case is prominent in Brazilian studies. Second-stage analysis suggests that the major themes under discussion include measurement, consulting, and descriptive approach. We argue that these themes illustrate the degree of influence of the hegemonic politics relevant to emerging economics, as these themes predominantly concern economic growth and a capitalist context. This paper discusses trends and practices in the Brazilian literature on SEA and argues that the focus means that SEA avoids critical debates of the role of capitalist logics in an emerging economy concerning sustainability. We urge the Brazilian academy to understand the implications of its reifying agenda and engage, counter-hegemonically, in a social and political agenda beyond the hegemonic support of a particular set of capitalist interests.