No abstract

Organizations are socially constructed phenomena. A crucial task for organizational research is to analyze how and why people construct organizations rather than other social forms. In this paper, it is argued that recent public-sector reforms can be interpreted as attempts at constructing organizations. Public-sector entities that could formerly be described as agents or arenas have been transformed into `more complete' organizations by installing or reinforcing local identity, hierarchy and rationality. This interpretation helps to explain important aspects of the reform process.

PurposeCorporate social responsibility (CSR) has emerged as a global trend involving corporations, states, international organizations and civil society organizations. It is far from clear what CSR stands for, what the trend really is, where it comes from, where it is heading and who the leading actors are. If one views it as a social movement, one must ask: a movement of what and for whom? The purpose of this paper is to examine the CSR trend in all its complexity and draw conclusions regarding its development and potential impact.Design/methodology/approachAnalysis of central documents and publications on CSR is combined with interviews with driving corporate actors.FindingsThis article portrays the CSR trend in three ways: as a regulatory framework that places new demands on corporations; as a mobilization of corporate actors to assist the development aid of states; and as a management trend. Each of these portraits suggests certain actors, relations, driving forces and interests as being central. An analysis shows that no one of these views seems to be more accurate than the others: rather the movement comprises a collection of diverse interests, actors, origins and trajectories. These multiple identities may partially describe the trend's success, but could equally well describe its contestation, fragility and fluidity.Originality/valueThe conceptual distinction shows the likely development and potential impact of a corporate social development. Moreover, the discussions help us reflect on the formation of management trends and how certain models come to flow rapidly and extensively around the globe, following and adding to institutional change – especially to changes in the roles, relations and boundaries between and among states, business corporations and civil society organizations.

Risk, regulation and practices of organizing are interrelated in a myriad of ways. Natural disasters, technical failures, and also processes of organizing are sources of risk to which organizations must respond and for which new managerial and regulatory practices are demanded. In this introduction we highlight three salient features of risk management: the (un)intended production of risk by organizations; the complex interrelationship between risk management and regulation; and the evolving and often contested nature of risk management knowledge. Each of these three themes is evident in the different contributions to this themed section. Copyright Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2006.