In strategy research, there is a consensus that strategy making resides on a continuum from planned to emergent where most strategies are made in a mixed way. Different contingency factors have been suggested to explain the factors that influence strategy making. Sustainability research seems to overlook most of this development and assumes instead that sustainability strategies are made in a purely planned way. We contribute to a better understanding of the role of different strategy making modes for sustainability in three ways. First, we point to the bias towards planned strategy formation in sustainability research. Second, we propose a new contingency factor to help explain sustainability strategy making based on the nature of the problem addressed. Third, we discuss strategy making for different types of sustainability problems. We argue that planned strategy making is expected for salient and non‐wicked problems while emergent strategy making is likely for non‐salient and wicked problems. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment
Both standards are comparatively successful in the German automotive and engineering industry which makes Germany an interesting place for researching their relationship. Two research questions are addressed in this study. First, (i) what explains why companies adopt both EMAS and ISO 14001?In the interviews that were conducted, this was addressed by asking what motivated the adoption of EMAS and ISO 14001, respectively, and how the two decisions were related at the firm. The second research question is which of two hypotheses can be confirmed:(ii) EMAS and ISO 14001 are complementary, i.e . implementation of one makes implementation of the other more likely (complementarity hypothesis).(iii) EMAS and ISO 14001 are substitutes, i.e. companies find one more compelling than the other and do not have an incentive to implement both (substitution hypothesis).It is found that the two standards are adopted for completely different reasons: while ISO 14001 is often done in response to external pressure, EMAS tends to be motivated internally.Further, it appears that EMAS and ISO 14001 are likely in a situation of direct competition at present which may well turn into complementarity in the future. The following Section is to Section 5 discusses them and shows the contribution of this study. Commission which manages it in cooperation with the competent bodies at the national level.Thus, EMAS is an instrument of public institutions whereas ISO 14001 certification is sold by private accreditation providers. Second, EMAS' requirements go beyond those of ISO 14001. (DIHK, 2010; ISO, 2005 ISO, , 2008. If the standards act as complements however, as suggested in hypothesis (ii), the two adoption curves should run more or less parallel. ***insert figure 2 about here*** DRIVERS OF STANDARDS ADOPTIONMany authors have distinguished external and internal factors driving corporate decisions about standard implementation. In the following, this distinction will be maintained although it should be noted that internal and external factors are likely to interact (Perkins and Neumayer, 2010). EXTERNAL FACTORSThe most relevant external factors for this study are (1) the organisational field, (2) the institutional environment of a firm, and (3) complementary standards such as ISO 9001.The organisational field in which a firm operates, i.e. its competitors and partner firms, influences corporate decisions and strategies (Bansal and Bogner, 2002;O'Neill et al., 1998 INTERNAL FACTORSThe two most important internal drivers suggested in the literature are (1) the availability of win-win possibilities (or perception thereof), and (2) , 2010) and that eco-efficiency is insufficient for obtaining sustainability (Dyllick and Hockerts, 2002;Young and Tilley, 2006). As will be shown below, the perception of how widely win-win opportunities are available depends mostly on the corporate culture.Other scholars argue that standard adoption may enable companies to pre-empt or avoid stringent regulation (Delmas and Terlaak, 2001;Khanna and Anton, ...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.