Reviews, action and learning on change management for ecodesign transition

Bronès, Fabien Albert; Carvalho, Marly Monteiro de; Zancul, Eduardo de Senzi

doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.009

Cited by 44 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 90 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Also expanding on need (D) -when project teams are employing the strategies to generate ideas -the suggested process enhancements should help project teams to mitigate for cognitive illusions by [42]: (Dxiv) was also a strong desire from those responsible for the design process in the partner company, probably because of the central role that understanding stakeholder perspectives plays in design thinking. Research on the human side has started to converge on some general principles, including (1) the transformative nature of sustainable product design and (2) the need to include both organisational and individual dimensions [51]. Using Lam's [52] model for organisational learning, need (F) can be expanded in two dimensionsindividual/collective and explicit/tacit -as follows.…”

Section: Overview Of Suggested Enhancementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating Sustainable Development and Design-Thinking-Based Product Design

Gould

Bratt

Mesquita

et al. 2019

Technologies and Eco-Innovation Towards Sustainability I

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this research was to integrate sustainable development and design-thinking-based product design in order that the product design then contributes to society's transition to a sustainable future. This is an important pursuit since product lifecycles are a major cause of society's current sustainability challenges. To address this, many authors argue for integrating sustainable development into existing design processes rather than developing stand-alone tools and methods. Through action research with a design consultancy who wanted to start working with sustainable product design, we iterated between three stages: understanding needs, designing action, and trying out the action. The first stage comprised document analysis, focus-group style workshops, a survey and interviews. When designing the actions (enhancements to their design-thinking-based process), we drew on literature on sustainable product design, decision-making for sustainability, and organisational learning and change for sustainability. We also drew on our research partners' practical experience. The enhanced process was tried out and further developed through feedback, student testing and co-development meetings. The result is an enhanced process where project teams (i) use the outcomes from the inspiration phase of the existing process to choose sustainable design strategies that are relevant for their particular project. Once the teams have chosen which strategies to work with, for example, design for remanufacture, we suggest that they (ii) use the strategies to develop ideation foci/questions that help them explore the design space. The third enhancement is for teams to (iii) compare concepts with respect to sustainability as part of their concept comparison and evaluation.

show abstract

Section: Overview Of Suggested Enhancementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating Sustainable Development and Design-Thinking-Based Product Design

Gould

Bratt

Mesquita

et al. 2019

Technologies and Eco-Innovation Towards Sustainability I

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Corporate Sustainability performance [44][45][46][47][48][49] Corporate Sustainability and strategic management [34,50,51] Sustainable business models [49,52] Corporate Sustainability reporting [13,30,53,54] Corporate Sustainability frameworks, tools and practices [55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64] Sustainable supply chain [65] Environmental Corporate Sustainability [66,67] Adopting Corporate Sustainability in specific countries/regions [68,69] Table 1 presents the literature reviews in CS grouped in seven key areas of research. These literature reviews are fundamentally important to advance the state of the art in CS; however, they have specific focus on certain areas of CS research.…”

Section: Research Topic Author(s)/yearmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking the Way of Doing Business: A Reframe of Management Structures for Developing Corporate Sustainability

Nunhes¹,

Bernardo²,

Oliveira³

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Corporate Sustainability (CS) literature has gone through a period of intense development. The moment is favorable to gathering these contributions to consistently advance the state of the art in CS and, also, discuss them to apply in real contexts. The main objective of the paper is to systematize, through a systematic literature review using content analysis of the 30 most cited articles from 2007 to 2017, the guiding pillars of CS management. The systematic search for papers was carried out in Scopus and Web of Science and the initial screening of the papers was assisted by the coding software MAXQDA 2018, through which the authors structured and analyzed their main insights, contributions and conclusions. After getting acquainted with the sample, an in-depth reading of the texts was conducted and 60 CS elements were identified. The elements cited in the relevant literature were grouped into 6 pillars related to Corporate sustainability strategy; Corporate governance; Human resources management; Knowledge and innovation management; Measurement, disclosure and independent assurance; and Management systems and Integrated management systems. The discussion of CS management pillars presented in this study provides understanding to researchers and managers on the main aspects that make up the integration of this construct in the companies, especially from a management point of view.

show abstract

“…Namely, although ecodesign domain has witnessed plentiful, and solutiondriven research (Boks & McAloone 2009;Li et al 2015;Brones & Monteiro de Carvalho 2015), the adequacy of ecodesign implementation levels continue to be questioned based on empirical research (Bey et al 2013;Short et al 2012;Deutz et al 2013;ADEME 2010). To counter this, since early 2000, a call for better integration of ecodesign into actual practices continues to be highlighted (Baumann et al 2002;Brones et al 2017;Boks & Stevels 2007;Hallstedt et al 2010;Stevels 2009). However, what is meant with implementation continue to be disputed as well as that of its targeted levels, although proposals exist (Pigosso et al 2013;Boks & Stevels 2007;Hallstedt et al 2010).…”

Section: 3mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, as also noted by Boks (2006), these levels by Baumann et al (2002) ignore the potential influence of individuals on the behavior of system. This level of interest at the micro-level, which is a focus taken in this dissertation, continues to be less investigated in the empirical studies examining ecodesign (see Table 1 in Publication 1); although a need for such investigation is pronounced (Boks 2006;Handfield et al 2001;Brones & Monteiro de Carvalho 2015;Dekoninck et al 2016;Stevels 2016;Brones et al 2017;Tingström 2007). Boks (2006) calls these micro-level issues as human factors that have mainly advanced along with research at a meso-level (Brones et al 2017;Verhulst & Boks 2012).…”

Section: 3mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, individuals may also have a possibility to influence organization among others through their respective teams (Lozano 2014). An examination of these aspects based on among others organizational and behavioral theories (Brones et al 2017) could deepen the understanding of ecodesign implementation issues. For instance, organizational policies may be interpreted by individuals either as impeding or enhancing the consideration of environmental topics within their work, regardless of communication from management, or the availability of tools or methods (Lenox & Ehrenfeld 1997).…”

Section: 3mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation