How can SMEs effectively embed environmental sustainability? Evidence on the relationships between cognitive frames, life cycle management and organizational learning process

Abstract

Cognitive frames help companies make sense of the intrinsic tensions of sustainability issues and influence how they respond to calls for sustainability over time. Yet, cognitive frames have been investigated as a static feature and previous studies have overlooked the evolutionary dynamics that can lead an organization to change its own frame. This study observes the evolution of life cycle management implementation through the theory of cognitive frames. We conducted a longitudinal multiple case study of 10 SMEs involved in a European‐funded project. Over a three‐year period we examined how cognitive approaches to sustainability issues changed according to different learning mindsets. A total of three cognitive frames and two learning mindsets were revealed from the analysis, thus providing two important contributions. First, cognitive frames are not static in time, but can change to give more importance to the environmental sustainability of a life cycle. Second, the type of learning mindsets that managers in SMEs share can trigger changes in organizational cognitive frames.

Sustainability Within the HRD Field: A Systematic Review

“…Based on this conceptualization of sustainability, we further expanded the definition and value of sustainability in the HRD setting. Our analysis revealed that “sustainability” was the most frequently used term in 13 out of the 59 publications, without any other words added (Bianchi et al, 2022; Brandi & Thomassen, 2021; Dragan et al, 2021; Garbie, 2015; Kafetzopoulos, 2023; Kolk, 2016; Maltseva et al, 2019; Palthe, 2013; Sheehan et al, 2014; Valentin, 2015; Vodonick, 2018; Waite, 2013).…”

Conceptualising active management of paradoxical tensions in corporate sustainability: A systematic literature review

“…However, values and other individual characteristics explain how cognitive frames vary over time as a consequence of the interactions between individuals (Benkert, 2020; Bianchi & Testa, 2022; Joseph et al, 2019; Sharma & Jaiswal, 2018). For instance, Joseph et al (2019) and Benkert (2020) defined and quantified the role of personal values in the openness of decision‐making regarding contrasting positions.…”

“…Some practices may act as a driver for specific RPs, as in the case of ‘learning and adaptation’, which leads to ‘strategic sensitivity’ (marked with an asterisk in Tables 3 and 4) (Bianchi & Testa, 2022; Carollo & Guerci, 2018; Ghadiri et al, 2015; Ivory & Brooks, 2018). Similarly, the practices of learning and structure can be helpful to acquire skills and knowledge and define and strengthen individual roles within the organisation, respectively.…”

Board of Directors' characteristics and environmental SDGs adoption: an international study

“…Embedding sustainability principles into strategy and operations is a complex process that is characterised by potentially conflicting objectives between sustainability goals and firm profitability (Bianchi & Testa, 2022; Hahn et al, 2018; Ivory & Brooks, 2018). This process must be driven by top management, but, as recently emphasised in several studies (Bianchi et al, 2022; Dahlmann & Grosvold, 2017; Slawinski et al, 2017), firms can only adopt environmental practices if they do not trigger excessive tension in terms of economic and financial sustainability.…”