Examining the dynamics of SER evolution: an institutional understanding

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide a theoretically informed analysis of social and environmental reporting (SER) evolution, i.e. how and why the SER evolved over time in a cooperative bank in Italy. Design/methodology/approach The paper is based on a qualitative fieldwork case study conducted from 2011 to 2015. Information and data were collected through several methods including: interviews with managers involved in the SER’s process; analysis of the SER-related documents; analysis of the website; and observations in the field. The analysis of the empirical evidence draws on the institutional logic (IL) perspective, which provides theoretical insights to interpret the role of the contrasting institutional forces in the evolution of SER. Findings The empirical analysis unveils three different stages in the evolution of SER: the “birth” whereby a new form of social reporting was initiated; the “development” through which SER was implemented to become a formal component of the organizational management; and the “de-structuring” when the SER was gradually de-composed. This gradual de-structuring, as well as the initiation and implementation processes, was influenced by different institutionally infused rationalities and logics. These institutionally infused rationalities and logics, along with the specific organizational and contextual events, provided the resources, and created the space and opportunity, for the SER-related changes to occur. Originality/value The analysis offers theoretical insights to understand “how” (i.e. processes) and “why” (i.e. the conditions under which) SER gradually evolved, i.e. emerged, was constructed and developed during the phases of implementation and post-implementation. Furthermore, it is shown that SER is multifunctional in nature and unveils how and why these multiple functions change over time. Finally, the analysis provides a theoretical contribution by illuminating the role that different and contrasting ILs play in driving the adoption of organizational practices.

Institutional logics and practice variations in sustainability reporting: evidence from an emerging field

“…Drawing on institutional studies, accounting researchers have demonstrated how logics shape organizational responses (Safari et al, 2020;Golyagina, 2020;Yee, 2020;Conrath-Hargreaves and W€ ustemann, 2019). Yet, as Contrafatto et al (2019) note, relatively little attention has been paid to the likelihood that logics drive accounting practices, including sustainability reporting. More specifically, accounting researchers have paid little attention to how loosely defined institutional arrangements, unclear institutional rules and sharp contestation between logics in an emerging field may drive greater practice variation at the organizational level (Vican and Pernell-Gallagher, 2013).…”

“…Channuntapipat et al, 2019;Cerbone and Maroun, 2019). However, the link between motives and practice variations remains poorly understood in the sustainability literature, both theoretically and empirically (Contrafatto et al, 2019). This paper fills this gap.…”

“…Sustainability researchers have deployed the notion of logics to understand the motivations underlying various sustainability initiatives (Kok et al, 2019;Cerbone and Maroun, 2019). For instance, Contrafatto et al (2019) argue that institutional logics are very useful for deciphering the uneven development of sustainability reporting practices, but note a relative dearth of research on the dynamics, logics and conditions of the evolution of sustainability reporting, especially in developing countries (Jamali et al, 2017). Similarly, Cerbone and Maroun (2019) argue that how logics are instantiated may explain the considerable variation observed in integrated reports.…”

The pre-history of sustainability reporting: a constructivist reading

“…Relevant questions for this time period include who produces the innovations (and how they do this), how these innovations differ from existing norms and practices, and how new practices create new networks. Institutional entrepreneurs have been studied for the social reporting of a cooperative bank by Contrafatto et al (2019), for environmental reporting in the UK and Spain by Bebbington et al (2012) and for SR by Levy et al (2010). The notion of institutional entrepreneurship is consistent with the argument that the different steps in institutional inscription are characterized by power, struggle and negotiation that involve multiple actors and their interests (Djelic and Sahlin-Andersson, 2006).…”

The implementation of sustainability reporting in a small and medium enterprise and the emergence of integrated thinking

“…It was, first of all, necessary to explore the institutional and organizational context of the HUB, to examine the sustainability implementation process within its accounting practices (Contrafatto, 2014). As institutional research has pointed out, the characteristics of the context can enable or complicate involvement in sustainability reporting (Contrafatto et al , 2019) and, as a result, the dynamics and the processes of implementation (in this case the implementation of sustainability) will be context-dependent (Modell, 2014). An analysis of the context in which HUB operates is, therefore, provided in the following section.…”