Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of Business Ethics
Published in: Journal of Business Ethics 4/2019

26-03-2018 | Original Paper

Two Birds with One Stone: The Quest for Addressing Both Business Goals and Social Needs with Innovation

Authors: Marina Candi, Monia Melia, Maria Colurcio

Published in: Journal of Business Ethics | Issue 4/2019

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

This research examines whether and how firms can meet both business goals and social needs through their innovation activities. We examine antecedents and consequences of innovation that addresses social needs, in addition to business goals, using data collected from European for-profit firms. We find that innovation including social intent is more likely under conditions of high market turbulence, which represents an important form of demand-driven threats. Meanwhile, we find no relationship with competitive intensity, a form of pressure driven threats. Together, these findings suggest that customers and other stakeholders are more likely to drive firms to focus on the social dimension than competitors. The findings also indicate that innovation including social intent is positively related with customer acceptance, which supports the notion that innovation can meet both business goals and social needs. This relationship is partially mediated by perceived market turbulence, which highlights the importance of customers and their demands for social responsibility. This research advances both theory and practice as we add to existing discourses on innovation by providing a broader than common perspective that includes the social dimension as a potential part of innovation conducted to meet business goals. Furthermore, we shed light on how and when firms are likely to include intended social outcomes in their innovation (with resultant improvement in performance) and when they are less likely to do so, which highlights a potential untapped opportunity.
previous article Reexamining Corporate Social Responsibility and Shareholder Value: The Inverted-U-Shaped Relationship and the Moderation of Marketing Capability
next article Squared Away: Veterans on the Board of Directors

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
Literature
Ang, S. H. (2008). Competitive intensity and collaboration: Impact on firm growth across technological environments. Strategic Management Journal,29(10), 1057–1075.
Auh, S., & Menguc, B. (2005). Balancing exploration and exploitation: The moderating role of competitive intensity. Journal of Business Research,58, 1652–1661.
Austin, J., Stevenson, H., & Wei-Skillern, J. (2006). Social and commercial entrepreneurship: Same, different, or both? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,30(1), 1–22.
Ayuso, S., Rodriguez, M. A., & Ricart, J. E. (2006). Responsible competitiveness at the ‘micro’ level of the firm using stakeholder dialogue as a source for new ideas: A dynamic capability underlying sustainable innovation. Corporate Governance,6(4), 475–490.
Bagozzi, R. P. (2011). Measurement and meaning in information systems and organizational research: Methodological and philosophical foundations. MIS Quarterly,35, 261–292.
Baltazar Herrera, M. E. (2015). Creating competitive advantage by institutionalizing corporate social innovation. Journal of Business Research,68(7), 1468–1474.
Barnett, W. P. (1997). The dynamics of competitive intensity. Administrative Science Quarterly,42, 128–160.
Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. L. (2003). Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of Management Review,28(2), 238–256.
Billing, R., & Scott, B. (1995). Renewable reporting: New material on environmental performance. CA Magazine-Chartered Accountant,128(2), 62–66.
Bocken, N. M. P., Short, S. W., Rana, P., & Evans, S. (2014). A literature and practice review to develop sustainable business model archetypes. Journal of Cleaner Production,65, 42–56.
Bocquet, R., Le Bas, C., Mothe, C., & Poussing, N. (2013). Are firms with different CSR profiles equally innovative? Empirical analysis with survey data. European Management Journal,31(6), 642–654.
Boons, F., & Lüdeke-Freund, F. (2013). Business models for sustainable innovation: State-of-the-art and steps towards a research agenda. Journal of Cleaner Production,45, 9–19.
Boons, F., Montalvo, C., Quist, J., & Wagner, M. (2013). Sustainable innovation, business models and economic performance: An overview. Journal of Cleaner Production,45, 1–8.
Brammer, S., & Millington, A. (2008). Does it pay to be different? An analysis of the relationship between corporate social and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal,29(12), 1325–1343.
Cadogan, J. W., Cui, C. C., & Li, E. K. Y. (2003). Export market-oriented behavior and export performance: The moderating roles of competitive intensity and technological turbulence. International Marketing Review,20(5), 493–513.
Cajaiba-Santana, G. (2014). Social innovation: Moving the field forward. A conceptual framework. Technological Forecasting and Social Change,82(2), 42–51.
Candi, M., Jae, H., Makarem, S., & Mohan, M. (2017). Consumer responses to functional, aesthetic and symbolic product design in online reviews. Journal of Business Research,81, 31–39.
Chan, R. Y. K., Hongwei, H., Chan, H. K., & Wang, W. Y. C. (2012). Environmental orientation and corporate performance: The mediation mechanism of green supply chain management and moderating effect of competitive intensity. Industrial Marketing Management,41, 621–630.
Chen, H., Zeng, S., Lin, H., & Ma, H. (2017). Munificence, Dynamism and complexity: How Industry Context Drives Corporate Sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment,26, 125–141.
Choi, N., & Majumdar, S. (2014). Social entrepreneurship as an essentially contested concept: Opening a new avenue for systematic future research. Journal of Business Venturing,29(3), 363–376.
Cohen, B., & Winn, M. I. (2007). Market imperfections, opportunity and sustainable entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing,22, 29–49.
Corner, P. D., & Ho, M. (2010). How opportunities develop in social entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,34(4), 635–659.
Cui, A. S., Griffith, D. A., & Cavusgil, S. T. (2005). The influence of competitive intensity and market dynamism on knowledge management capabilities of multinational corporation subsidiaries. Journal of International Marketing,13(3), 32–53.
Danneels, E. (2002). The dynamics of product innovation and firm competences. Strategic Management Journal,23(12), 1095–1121.
Danneels, E., & Sethi, R. (2011). New product exploration under environmental turbulence. Organization Science,22(4), 1026–1039.
Dawson, P., & Daniel, L. (2010). Understanding social innovation: A provisional framework. International Journal of Technology Management,51(1), 9–21.
De Medeiros, J. F., Vidor, G., & Ribeiro, J. L. D. (2015). Driving factors for the success of the green innovation market: A relationship system proposal. Journal of Business Ethics,2015, 1–15.
Dean, T. J., & McMullen, J. S. (2007). Toward a theory of sustainable entrepreneurship: Reducing environmental degradation through entrepreneurial action. Journal of Business Venturing,22, 50–76.
Dellyana, D., Simatupang, T. M., & Dhewanto, W. (2016). Business model innovation in different strategic networks. International Journal of Business,21(3), 191–215.
Delmas, M. A., & Pekovic, S. (2015). Resource efficiency strategies and market conditions. Long Range Planning,48(2), 80–94.
Dembek, K., Singh, P., & Bhakoo, V. (2016). Literature Review of Shared Value: A Theoretical concept or a Management Buzzword? Journal of Business Ethics,137(2), 231–267.
Demil, B., & Lecocq, X. (2010). Business model evolution: In search of dynamic consistency. Long Range Planning,43(2), 227–246.
Doane, D., & Abasta-Vilaplana, N. (2005). The myth of CSR. Stanford Social Innovation Review,3(3), 22–29.
Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review,20(1), 65–91.
Droge, C., Calantone, R., & Harmancioglu, N. (2008). New product success: Is it really controllable by managers in highly turbulent environments? Journal of Product Innovation Management,25(3), 272–286.
Elkington, J., & Hartigan, P. (2007). The power of unreasonable people: How social entrepreneurs create markets that change the world. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Fernández-Kranz, D., & Santalo, J. (2010). When Necessity Becomes a Virtue: The Effect of Product Market Competition on Corporate Social Responsibility. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy,19(2), 453–487.
Frankenberger, K., Weiblen, T., & Gassmann, O. (2014). The antecedents of open business models: An exploratory study of incumbent firms. R&D Management,44(2), 173–188.
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston, MA: Pitman.
Garriga, E., & Mele, D. (2004). Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory. Journal of Business Ethics,53, 51–71.
Gilley, K. M., Worrell, D. L., Davidson, W. N., & El-Jelly, A. (2000). Corporate environmental initiatives and anticipated firm performance: The differential effects of process-driven versus product-driven greening initiatives. Journal of Management,26(6), 1199–1216.
Grant, R. M. (2010). Contemporary strategy analysis. West Sussex: Wiley.
Grewal, R., Cote, J. A., & Baumgartner, H. (2004). Multicollinearity and measurement error in structural equation models: Implications for theory testing. Marketing Science,23(4), 519–529.
Griffin, J. J., & Mahon, J. F. (1997). The corporate social performance and corporate financial performance debate: Twenty-five years of incomparable research. Business and Society,36(1), 5–31.
Griffin, A., & Page, A. L. (1993). An interim report on measuring product development success and failure. Journal of Product Innovation Management,10(4), 291–308.
Griffin, A., & Page, A. L. (1996). PDMA success measurement project: Recommended measures for product development success and failure. Journal of Product Innovation Management,13(6), 478–496.
Haigh, N., & Hoffman, A. J. (2012). Hybrid Organizations: The Next Chapter of Sustainable Business. Organizational Dynamics,41(2), 126–134.
Haigh, N., Walker, J., Bacq, S., & Kickul, J. (2015). Hybrid Organizations: Origins, Strategies, Impacts, and Implications. California Management Review,57(3), 5–12.
Hall, J. K., Daneke, G. A., & Lenox, M. J. (2010). Sustainable development and entrepreneurship: Past contributions and future directions. Journal of Business Venturing,25(5), 439–448.
Hämäläinen, T. J., & Heiskala, R. (2007). Social innovations, institutional change and economic performance: Making sense of structural adjustment processes in industrial sectors, regions, and societies. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Harrison, J. S., & Freeman, R. E. (1999). Stakeholders, social responsibility, and performance: Empirical evidence and theoretical perspectives. Academy of Management Journal,42(5), 479–485.
He, Z. L., & Wong, P. K. (2004). Exploration versus exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science,15(4), 481–494.
Heirati, N., O’Cass, A., Schoefer, K., & Siahtiri, V. (2016). Do professional service firms benefit from customer and supplier collaborations in competitive, turbulent environments? Industrial Marketing Management,55, 50–58.
Hockerts, K. (2015). How hybrid organizations turn antagonistic assets into complementarities. California Management Review,57(3), 83–106.
Hockerts, K., & Morsing, M. (2008). A literature review on corporate social responsibility in the innovation process (pp. 1–28). Frederiksberg: Copenhagen Business School (CBS), Center for Corporate Social Responsibility.
Hockerts, K., & Wüstenhagen, R. (2010). Greening Goliaths versus emerging Davids — Theorizing about the role of incumbents and new entrants in sustainable entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing,25(5), 481–492.
Holt, D., & Littlewood, D. (2015). Identifying, mapping, and monitoring the impact of hybrid firms. California Management Review,57(3), 107–125.
Hughes, M., & Morgan, R. E. (2007). Deconstructing the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and business performance at the embryonic stage of firm growth. Industrial Marketing Management,36(5), 651–661.
Isaksson, R., Johansson, P., & Fischer, K. (2010). Detecting supply chain innovation potential for sustainable development. Journal of Business Ethics,97(3), 425–442.
Jansen, J. J., Van Den Bosch, F. A., & Volberda, H. W. (2006). Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance: Effects of organizational antecedents and environmental moderators. Management Science,52(11), 1661–1674.
Janssen, O., Van De Vliert, E., & West, M. (2004). The bright and dark sides of individual and group innovation: A special issue introduction. Journal of Organizational Behavior,25(2), 129–145.
Jaworski, B. J., & Kohli, A. K. (1993). Market orientation: Antecedents and consequences. The Journal of Marketing,57, 53–70.
Johns, G. (2006). The essential impact of context on organizational behavior. Academy of Management Review,31(2), 386–408.
Johnson, M. W., Christensen, C. C., & Kagermann, H. (2008). Reinventing your business model. Harvard Business Review,86(12), 50–59.
Joyce, A., Paquin, R., & Pigneur, Y. (2015). The triple layered business model canvas: A tool to design more sustainable business models. In ARTEM organizational creativity international conference, 26–27 March 2015, Nancy, France.
Kandemir, D., Yaprak, A., & Cavusgil, S. T. (2006). Alliance orientation: Conceptualization, measurement, and impact on market performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,34(3), 324–340.
Ketata, I., Sofka, W., & Grimpe, C. (2015). The role of internal capabilities and firms’ environment for sustainable innovation: Evidence for Germany. R&D Management,45(1), 60–75.
Kuckertz, A., & Wagner, M. (2010). The influence of sustainability orientation on entrepreneurial intentions — Investigating the role of business experience. Journal of Business Venturing,25(5), 524–539.
Lee, M., & Jay, J. (2015). Strategic responses to hybrid social ventures. California Management Review,57(3), 126–148.
Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. (2001). Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology,86(1), 114.
Lüdeke-Freund, F. (2010). Towards a conceptual framework of ‘business models for sustainability’. In R. Wever, J. Quist, A. Tukker, J. Woudstra, F. Boons & N. Beute (Eds.), Knowledge collaboration & learning for sustainable innovation, Delft. ERSCP-EMSU Conference 2010, The Netherlands, October 25–29, 2010
Lusch, R. F., & Laczniak, G. R. (1989). Macroenvironmental forces, marketing strategy and business performance: A futures research approach. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,17(4), 283–295.
Magretta, J. (2002). Why business models matter. Harvard Business Review, 80(5), 86–92.
March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science,2(1), 71–87.
Marquaridt, D. W. (1970). Generalized inverses, ridge regression, biased linear estimation, and nonlinear estimation. Technometrics,12(3), 591–612.
Martin, D. (1976). Planning and the corporate philosophy. Managerial Planning,25(2), 1.
McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review,26(1), 117–127.
Meek, W. R., Pacheco, D. F., & York, J. G. (2010). The impact of social norms on entrepreneurial action: Evidence from the environmental entrepreneurship context. Journal of Business Venturing,25(5), 493–509.
Meyer, H. (1999). When the cause is just. The Journal of Business Strategy,20(6), 27–31.
Miller, D., & Friesen, P. H. (1982). Innovation in conservative and entrepreneurial firms: Two models of strategic momentum. Strategic Management Journal,3, 1–25.
Moore, J. F. (1993). Predators and prey: A new ecology of competition. Harvard Business Review,71(3), 75–83.
Moorman, C., & Rust, R. T. (1999). The role of marketing. The Journal of Marketing,63, 180–197.
Morioka, S. N., Evans, S., & De Carvalho, M. M. (2016). Sustainable business model innovation: Exploring evidences in sustainability reporting. Procedia CIRP,40, 659–667.
Mulgan, G. (2006). The process of Social Innovation. Innovations,1(2), 145–162.
Murray, R., Caulier-Grice, J., & Mulgan, G. (2010). The open book of social innovation. London: National endowment for science, technology and the art.
Nicolopoulou, K., Karataş-Özkan, M., Vas, C., & Nouman, M. (2015). An incubation perspective on social innovation: The London Hub—A social incubator. R&D Management,47(3), 368–384.
Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization studies,24(3), 403–441.
Osburg, T., & Schmidpeter, R. (2013). Social innovation: Solutions for a sustainable future. Berlin: Springer.
Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2010). Business Model Generation. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Paramanathan, S., Farrukh, C., Phaal, R., & Probert, D. (2004). Implementing industrial sustainability: The research issues in technology management. R&D Management,34(5), 527–537.
Parrish, B. D. (2010). Sustainability-driven entrepreneurship: Principles of organization design. Journal of Business Venturing,25(5), 510–523.
Peloza, J., & Shang, J. (2011). What business leaders should know: Investing in CSR to enhance customer value. Director Notes Series, The Conference Board Governance Center 3(3), February 2011.
Phills, J., Deiglmeier, K., & Miller, D. (2008). Rediscovering Social Innovation. Stanford Social Innovation Review,6(4), 34–43.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology,88(5), 879.
Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). The big idea: Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review,89(1), 2.
Rettab, B., Brik, A., & Mellahi, K. (2009). A study of management perceptions of the impact of corporate social responsibility on organisational performance in emerging economies: The case of Dubai. Journal of Business Ethics,89(3), 371–390.
Rindova, V. P., Williamson, I. O., Petkova, A. P., & Sever, J. M. (2005). Being good or being known: An empirical examination of the dimensions, antecedents, and consequences of organizational reputation. Academy of Management Journal,48(6), 1033–1049.
Rueda-Manzanares, A., Aragón-Correa, J. A., & Sharmaw, S. (2008). The Influence of Stakeholders on the Environmental Strategy of Service Firms: The Moderating Effects of Complexity, Uncertainty and Munificence. British Journal of Management,19, 185–203.
Russo Spena, T., Colurcio, M., & Melia, M. (2017). Framing the new social-service innovation Midset. In T. Russo Spena, C. Mele, & M. Nuutinen (Eds.), Perspectives and experiences (pp. 205–235). Cham: Springer.
Saemundsson, R. J., & Candi, M. (2014). Antecedents of Innovation Strategies in New Technology-based Firms: Interactions between the Environment and Founder Team Composition. Journal of Product Innovation Management,31(5), 939–955.
Santos, F., Pache, A. C., & Birkholz, C. (2015). Making Hybrids Work: Aligning business models and organizational design for social enterprises. California Management Review,57(3), 36–58.
Santos-Vijande, M. L., & Álvarez-González, L. I. (2007). Innovativeness and organizational innovation in total quality oriented firms: The moderating role of market turbulence. Technovation,27(9), 514–532.
Schaltegger, S., Lüdeke-Freund, F., & Hansen, E. G. (2012). Business cases for sustainability: The role of business model innovation for corporate sustainability. International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development,6(2), 95–119.
Schmidpeter, R. (2013). Social innovation: A new concept for a sustainable future? Social innovation (pp. 1–9). Berlin: Springer.
Shah, R., & Goldstein, S. M. (2006). Use of structural equation modeling in operations management research: Looking back and forward. Journal of Operations Management,24(2), 148–169.
Shepherd, D. A., & Patzelt, H. (2011). The new field of sustainable entrepreneurship: Studying entrepreneurial action linking “what is to be sustained” with “what is to be developed”. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,35(1), 137–163.
Siguaw, J. A., Simpson, P. M., & Enz, C. A. (2006). Conceptualising innovation orientation: A framework for study and integration of innovation research. Journal of Product Innovation Management,23(6), 556–574.
Slater, S. F., & Narver, J. C. (1994). Does competitive environment moderate the market orientation-performance relationship? The Journal of Marketing,58, 46–55.
Sommer, A. (2012). Managing green business model transformations. Berlin: Springer.
Staudt, S., Shao, C. Y., Dubinsky, A. J., & Wilson, P. H. (2014). Corporate social responsibility, perceived customer value, and customer-based brand equity: A cross-national comparison. Journal of Strategic Innovation and Sustainability,10(1), 65–87.
Strand, R. (2014). Strategic leadership of corporate sustainability. Journal of Business Ethics,123(4), 687–706.
Stubbs, W., & Cocklin, C. (2008). Conceptualizing a “sustainability business model”. Organization & Environment,21(2), 103–127.
Theodosiou, M., Kehagias, J., & Katsikea, E. (2012). Strategic orientations, marketing capabilities and firm performance: An empirical investigation in the context of frontline managers in service organizations. Industrial Marketing Management,41(7), 1058–1070.
Tsai, K. H., & Yang, S. Y. (2013). Firm innovativeness and business performance: The joint moderating effects of market turbulence and competition. Industrial Marketing Management,42, 1279–1294.
Van der Have, R. P., & Rubalcaba, L. (2016). Social innovation research: An emerging area of innovation studies? Research Policy,45(9), 1923–1935.
Van Tonder, E., & Roberts-Lombard, M. (2013). A theoretical framework for managing CSR plans and related initiatives in the modern business environment. Journal of Business & Economics Research,11(12), 503.
Vargo, S. L., Wieland, H., & Akaka, M. A. (2015). Innovation through institutionalization: A service ecosystems perspective. Industrial Marketing Management,44, 63–72.
Vilanova, M., Lozano, J. M., & Arenas, D. (2009). Exploring the nature of the relationship between CSR and competitiveness. Journal of Business Ethics,87(1), 57–69.
Viñals, C. R. (2013). Introduction to social innovation as a new form of organisation in knowledge-based societies. In: C. R. Viñals & C. Parra Rodriguez (Eds.), Social Innovation: New Forms of Organisation in Knowledge-Based Societies (pp. 3–15). London: Rutledge.
Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance - Financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal,18(4), 303–319.
Wei, Z., Yang, D., Sun, B., & Gu, M. (2014). The fit between technological innovation and business model design for firm growth: Evidence from China. R&D Management,44, 288–305.
Wilson, F., & Post, J. E. (2013). Business models for people, planet (& profits): Exploring the phenomena of social business, a market-based approach to social value creation. Small Business Economics,40(3), 715–737.
Wright, P., & Ferris, S. P. (1997). Agency conflict and corporate strategy: The effect of divestment on corporate value. Strategic Management Journal,18(1), 77–83.
York, J. G., & Venkataraman, S. (2010). The entrepreneur–environment nexus: Uncertainty, innovation, and allocation. Journal of Business Venturing,25(5), 449–463.
Yunus, M., Moingeon, B., & Lehmann-Ortega, L. (2010). Building social business models: Lessons from the Grameen experience. Long Range Planning,43(2), 308–325.
Zhao, E. Y., & Lounsbury, M. (2016). An institutional logics approach to social entrepreneurship: Market logic, religious diversity, and resource acquisition by microfinance organizations. Journal of Business Venturing,31(6), 643–662.
Metadata
Title
Two Birds with One Stone: The Quest for Addressing Both Business Goals and Social Needs with Innovation
Authors
Marina Candi
Monia Melia
Maria Colurcio
Publication date
26-03-2018
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
Journal of Business Ethics / Issue 4/2019
Print ISSN: 0167-4544
Electronic ISSN: 1573-0697
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3853-y

Other articles of this Issue 4/2019

Journal of Business Ethics 4/2019 Go to the issue

Original Paper

Employees as Conduits for Effective Stakeholder Engagement: An Example from B Corporations

Original Paper

Exploring the Link Between Human Rights, the Capability Approach and Corporate Responsibility

Original Paper

Ethical Implications and Accountability of Algorithms

Original Paper

Squeezing Psychological Freedom in Corporate–Community Engagement

Original Paper

Reexamining Corporate Social Responsibility and Shareholder Value: The Inverted-U-Shaped Relationship and the Moderation of Marketing Capability

Original Paper

Justice and Corporate Governance: New Insights from Rawlsian Social Contract and Sen’s Capabilities Approach