Dyllick and Hockerts (2002, p 130) reify this by claiming that corporate sustainability is concerned with the “eco-efficiency” of the business, however, they fail to acknowledge the cultural and organisational changes which must occur in a business in order to implement pragmatic approaches to corporate sustainability.
Dyllick and Hockerts (2002, p 130) reify this by claiming that corporate sustainability is concerned with the “eco-efficiency” of the business, however, they fail to acknowledge the cultural and organisational changes which must occur in a business in order to implement pragmatic approaches to corporate sustainability.Linnenluecke and Griffiths (2010) recognise these intricate and complex cultural, individual and organisational changes, which is then incongruent with the model proposed by Harris and Crane (2002), where they exemplify that only slight changes which centre around incentive programs and awards will suffice in adopting a sustainability practice.Tags: Essays On Dover Beach By Matthew ArnoldEssay On Management StylesEasy How To Essay TopicsGcse Media Coursework Mark SchemeThemes And ThesisGothic Short Story EssaysGood Argumentative Essay Tips
They argue that a top-down management approach proliferates the prospects of success in sustainability, as they allow for employee empowerment and support.
This approach, now, has indirectly confirmed Borland’s (2009) theory that sustainability can be a successful process which will thrive with the support and leadership of senior management.
This revolves around the concept that there are manifold articles which suggest opposing views about a businesses approach to sustainability, how a business implements sustainability through change, and how sustainability grows as a culture throughout a business.
Stoughton and Ludema (2012) claim that there are various perspectives in which sustainability, growth and change all occur, and this is consistent with the cultural perspective on change as it considers the values and beliefs of a company from the top down.
These two approaches exemplify and confirm that the current literature on corporate sustainability is contradictory and inconsistent.
Master Thesis Competition - Essays On Innovation And Sustainability
Drivers for Corporate Sustainability The first driver for sustainability identified for the purposes of this paper is competitiveness, and ultimately achieving competitve advantage (Bansal & Roth, 2000).This drive away from top-down management can allow for variance and independence throughout the organisation, but can also lead to inconsistent viewpoints between middle-managers and senior management, which then opens the door for conflict.Lastly relating to senior management, Berns et al (2009) claim that the lack of support from senior management can be the result of a lack of understanding of the sustainability process, and whether such a change will successfully benefit the business.Borland (2009) asserts that the culture and implementation of sustainability is a process which begins from the influences of senior-management in a top-down approach.Conversely, Martin (1992) expresses that the culture of change and sustainability is intrinsically embedded within fragmented groups of employees who share commonalities and values, individualistically.Corporate sustainability has been a prominent and emerging notion within the business environment, which has called for pragmatic strategies to be implemented.For the purposes of this paper, corporate sustainability will be defined as a businesses internal and external responses to environmental and community-based concerns, which aims to meet contemporary needs, while also allowing future businesses to meet their needs (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987; Salzmann, Ionescu-Somers, & Steger, 2005).Ultimately, it can be noted that corporate sustainability has become a continual focal point for modern businesses, stakeholders, and individuals, and the process for change to implement sustainability heavily relies on the influence of senior management.The Concept and Literature of Sustainability Gladwin, Kennelly and Krause (1995) ascertain that a society which is successfully sustainable can outlast the physical and natural demands of society for generations.Dyllick and Hockerts (2002) convey a three-dimensional model to sustainability, identifying that economic sustainability, environmental sustainability and social sustainability are all aspects of change which must be accounted for in order to understand the short term and long term benefits of change to sustainability.If senior management cannot understand the risks/implications of change, then they cannot extend their support. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 21(12): 1492–1502.