nach oben

Journal of Business Ethics

Erschienen in:

18.10.2016

Achieving Shared Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Value Creation: Toward a Social Resource-Based View (SRBV) of the Firm

verfasst von: Wendy L. Tate, Lydia Bals

Erschienen in: Journal of Business Ethics | Ausgabe 3/2018

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

While the economic and environmental dimensions of the triple bottom line (TBL) have been covered extensively by management theory and practice, the social dimension remains largely underrepresented. The resource-based view (RBV) of the firm and the natural resource-based view (NRBV) of the firm are revisited to lay the theoretical foundation for exploring how the social dimension might be addressed. Social capabilities are then explored by looking at the social entrepreneurship literature and illustrative cases with the purpose of elaborating RBV toward a social resource-based view (SRBV) of the firm. Three illustrative cases, which represent social businesses located in catastrophe-ridden Haiti, show how capabilities are used to overcome challenging constraints. The goal for the social entrepreneur is to employ the appropriate capabilities to ensure economic success, a positive environmental impact, and social benefits that leave the local community in a better position than without the business. Just as NRBV is a previous elaboration of RBV, so can SRBV be an elaborated theoretical foundation for future research. The components of a theory are systematically addressed by extending the range of variables (adding social capabilities), extending the domain (including stakeholders with economic, environmental, and/or social stakes), and offering propositions on variable relationships and outcome predictions (linking social capabilities and shared TBL value creation). By highlighting the social capabilities of social entrepreneurs, this research illuminates the micro-foundations of corporate social responsibility, emphasizing the value of individual level analyses.

Vorheriger Artikel Seize the Day or Save the World? The Importance of Ethical Claims and Product Nature Congruity

Nächster Artikel Mandated Social Disclosure: An Analysis of the Response to the California Transparency in Supply Chains Act of 2010

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

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!

Jetzt informieren

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!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Collective wealth has evolved into concepts such as TBL sustainability (Triple Bottom Line; economic, environmental and social; Elkington 1998) and shared value (Porter and Kramer 2006, 2011).

Social business models can be adopted by firms of various sizes and start-ups (e.g., Pura Vida Coffee; Wilson and Post 2013) or existing firms (e.g., the Grameen Danone collaboration; Yunus et al. 2010).

While many hybrid businesses in the literature have a focus on economic and social goals (e.g., Santos 2012; Doherty et al. 2014; Gupta et al. 2015), but do not necessarily cover the environmental side, our sample within this paper features businesses with TBL sustainability objectives.

An organizational form is an “archetypal configuration of structures and practices” that is “regarded as appropriate within an institutional context” (Greenwood and Suddaby 2006, p. 30).

The term “social capability” also exists in economics to describe countries’ overall education and technical competence, and the various institutions that shape the economic environment (e.g., Abramovitz 1986). That is not what is meant here.

Although the social entrepreneurship literature more often utilizes the wording “resources” instead of ”capabilities,” we see this nevertheless in the spirit of an SRBV; due to the disparate terminology existing in the literature, these studies might only partly refer to resources and/or capabilities as defined earlier in this paper.

Despite the name, this will feature economic, environmental, and social impact, depending on the respective business model. The cases CHIFA, EPRO, and CLEAPRO covered all three impact dimensions.

That expression is just meant figuratively; the local community does not have equity stakes in the business. What is meant it that they are the ones this business wants to create value for.

Abramovitz, M. (1986). Catching up, forging ahead, and falling behind. Journal of Economic History, 46(2), 386–406.

Aguinis, H. (2011). Organizational responsibility: Doing good and doing well. In S. Zedeck (Ed.), APA handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 855–879). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. (2012). What we know and don’t know about corporate social responsibility: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 38(4), 932–968.

Ahi, P., & Searcy, C. (2013). A comparative literature analysis of definitions for green and sustainable supply chain management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 52, 329–341.

Barnea, A., & Rubin, A. (2010). Corporate social responsibility as a conflict between shareholders. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(1), 71–86.

Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.

Barney, J., Ketchen, D. J., Jr., & Wright, M. (2011). The future of resource-based theory: Revitalization or decline? Journal of Management, 37(5), 1299–1315.

Barron, D. N., West, E., & Hannan, M. T. (1994). A time to grow and a time to die: Growth and mortality of credit unions in New York City, 1914–1990. American Journal of Sociology, 100(2), 381–421.

Battilana, J., & Lee, M. (2014). Advancing research on hybrid organizing-insights from the study of social enterprises. The Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 397–441.

Battilana, J., Lee, M., Walker, J., & Dorsey, C. (2012). In search of the hybrid ideal. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 10, 51–55.

BCTA (2011). Business call to action 2011. Barriers to inclusive business. http://www.businesscalltoaction.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Barriers-to-Inclusive-Business-Final-LR.pdf. Accessed December 28, 2014.

Berle, A. A. (1931). Corporate powers as powers in trust. Harvard Law Review, 44(7), 1049–1074.

Boons, F., & Luedeke-Freund, F. (2013). Business models for sustainable innovation: state-of-the-art and steps toward a research agenda. Journal of Cleaner Production, 45(April), 9–19.

Borland, H., Ambrosini, V., Lindgreen, A., & Vanhamme, J. (2016). Building theory at the intersection of ecological sustainability and strategic management. Journal of Business Ethics, 135, 293–307.

Bowen, H. R. (1953). Social responsibility of the businessman. New York, NY: Harper & Row.

Brandsen, T., & Karré, P. M. (2011). Hybrid organizations: No cause for concern? International Journal of Public Administration, 34(13), 827–836.

Brück, T., Naudé, W., & Verwimp, P. (2011). Small business, entrepreneurship and violent conflict in developing countries. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 24(2), 161–178.

Calton, J. M., Werhane, P. H., Hartman, L. P., & Bevan, D. (2013). Building partnerships to create social and economic value at the base of the global development pyramid. Journal of Business Ethics, 117(4), 721–733.

Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497–505.

Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility evolution of a definitional construct. Business and Society, 38(3), 268–295.

Chatain, O. (2011). Value creation, competition, and performance in buyer-supplier relationships. Strategic Management Journal, 32(1), 76–102.

Corner, P., & Ho, M. (2010). How opportunities develop in social entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(4), 635–659.

Corner, P., & Wu, S. (2012). Dynamic capability emergence in the venture creation process. International Small Business Journal, 30(2), 138–160.

Crane, A., Palazzo, G., Spence, L. J., & Matten, D. (2014). Contesting the value of ‘‘Creating Shared Value’’. California Management Review, 56(2), 130–151.

D’Aunno, T., Sutton, R. I., & Price, R. H. (1991). Isomorphism and external support in conflicting institutional environments: A study of drug abuse treatment units. Academy of Management Journal, 34(3), 636–661.

Davis, K. (1960). Can business afford to ignore social responsibilities? California Management Review, 2(3), 70–76.

Dees, J. G. (1998). Enterprising nonprofits. Harvard Business Review, 76(1), 55–66.

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.

Dodd, E. M. (1932). For whom are corporate managers trustees? Harvard Law Review, 45, 1145–1163.

Doherty, B., Haugh, H., & Lyon, F. (2014). Social enterprises as hybrid organizations: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 16(4), 417–436.

Dubois, A., & Gibbert, M. (2010). From complexity to transparency: Managing the interplay between theory, method and empirical phenomena in IMM case studies. Industrial Marketing Management, 39(1), 129–136.

Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.

Eisenhardt, K., & Martin, J. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21(10–11), 1105–1121.

Elkington, J. (1998). Cannibals with forks. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers.

Ellram, L. M. (1996). The use of the case study method in logistics research. Journal of Business Logistics, 17(2), 93–138.

Fallon, N. (2014). What is corporate social responsibility? Business News Daily, February 27, 2014.

Frederick, W. C. (1960). The growing concern over business responsibility. California Management Review, 2(4), 54–61.

Freeman, R., & Reed, D. (1983). Stockholders and stakeholders: A new perspective on corporate governance. California Management Review, 25(3), 88–106.

Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine, September 13, 1970.

Gawell, M. (2013). Social entrepreneurship-innovative challengers or adjustable followers? Social Enterprise Journal, 9(2), 203–220.

Gladwin, T. N., Kennelly, J. J., & Krause, T. S. (1995). Shifting paradigms for sustainable development: Implications for management theory and research. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 874–907.

Glavas, A., & Mish, J. (2015). Resources and capabilities of triple bottom line firms: Going over old or breaking new ground? Journal of Business Ethics, 127(3), 623–642.

Global Footprint Network (2016). Earth Overshoot Day. http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/earth_overshoot_day. Accessed October 1, 2016.

Gold, S., Seuring, S., & Beske, P. (2010). Sustainable supply chain management and inter-organizational resources: a literature review. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 17(4), 230–245.

Greenwood, R., & Suddaby, R. (2006). Institutional entrepreneurship in mature fields: The big five accounting firms. Academy of Management Journal, 49(1), 27–48.

Gupta, S., Beninger, S., & Ganesh, J. (2015). A hybrid approach to innovation by social enterprises: Lessons from Africa. Social Enterprise Journal, 11(1), 89–112.

Hahn, R., & Gold, S. (2014). Resources and governance in “base of the pyramid”-partnerships: Assessing collaborations between businesses and non-business actors. Journal of Business Research, 67(7), 1321–1333.

Hart, S. L. (1995). A natural-resource-based view of the firm. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 986–1014.

Hart, S. L., & Dowell, G. (2010). A natural-resource-based view of the firm: Fifteen years after. Journal of Management, 37(5), 1464–1479.

Hart, S., & Milstein, M. B. (2003). Creating sustainable value. Academy of Management Executive, 17(2), 56–69.

Hassini, E., Surti, C., & Searcy, C. (2012). A literature review and a case study of sustainable supply chains with a focus on metrics. International Journal of Production Economics, 140(1), 69–82.

Haugh, H. (2005). A research agenda for social entrepreneurship. Social Enterprise Journal, 1(1), 1–12.

Hunt, S. D., & Morgan, R. M. (1995). The comparative advantage theory of competition. The Journal of Marketing, 59(2), 1–15.

Hussain, N., Rigoni, U., & Orij, R. P. (2016). Corporate governance and sustainability performance: Analysis of triple bottom line performance. Journal of Business Ethics. doi:10.1007/s10551-016-3099-5

Jay, J. (2013). Navigating paradox as a mechanism of change and innovation in hybrid organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 137–159.

Jenkins, B., & Fries, L. (2012). PROJECT NURTURE: Partnering for business opportunity and development impact. Cambridge, MA: The CSR Initiative at the Harvard Kennedy School.

Jick, T. D. (1979). Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 602–611.

Jo, H., & Maretno, A. H. (2011). Corporate governance and firm value: The impact of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 103(3), 351–383.

Jones Christensen, L., Siemsen, E., & Balasubramanian, S. (2015). Consumer behavior change at the base of the pyramid: Bridging the gap between for-profit and social responsibility strategies. Strategic Management Journal, 36(2), 307–317.

Juran, J. M. (1995). A history of managing for quality: The evolution, trends, and future directions of managing for quality. Milwaukee, WI: ASQC Quality press.

Ketokivi, M., & Choi, T. (2014). The renaissance of case research as a scientific method. Journal of Operations Management, 32(5), 232–240.

Khanna, T., & Yafeh, Y. (2005). Business groups in emerging markets: Paragons or parasites? ECGI-Finance Working Paper 92.

Klassen, R. D., & Vachon, S. (2003). Collaboration and evaluation in the supply chain: the impact on plant-level environmental investment. Production and Operations Management, 12(3), 336–352.

Klassen, R. D., & Vereecke, A. (2012). Social issues in supply chains: capabilities link responsibility, risk (opportunity), and performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 140(1), 103–115.

Kleindorfer, P. R., Singhal, K., & Wassenhove, L. N. (2005). Sustainable operations management. Production and Operations Management, 14(4), 482–492.

Kolk, A., & Lenfant, F. (2015). Cross-sector collaboration, institutional gaps, and fragility: The role of social innovation partnerships in a conflict-affected region. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 34(2), 287–303.

Lavie, D. (2006). The competitive advantage of interconnected firms: An extension of the resource-based view. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 638–658.

Lee, J. L., Mitchell, T. R., & Sablynski, C. J. (1999). Qualitative research in organizational and vocational psychology, 1979–1999. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 55(2), 161–187.

Lepoutre, J., & Aimé, H. (2006). Investigating the impact of firm size on small business social responsibility: a critical review. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(3), 257–273.

Lisi, I. E. (2016). Determinants and Performance Effects of Social Performance Measurement Systems. Journal of Business Ethics. doi:10.1007/s10551-016-3287-3.

London, T., & Hart, S. L. (2011). Creating a fortune with the base of the pyramid. Next generation business strategies for the base of the pyramid, 1–18.

Longoni, A., & Cagliano, R. (2016). Sustainable innovativeness and the triple bottom line: The role of organizational time perspective. Journal of Business Ethics. doi:10.1007/s10551-016-3239-y

Lyons, T. (2013). The role of social entrepreneurship in sustainable business. http://www.triplepundit.com/2013/09/role-social-entrepreneurship-sustainable-business. Accessed December 2, 2014.

Mahoney, J. T., & Pandian, J. R. (1992). The resource-based view within the conversation of strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 13(5), 363–380.

Mair, J., & Martí, I. (2006). Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight. Journal of World Business, 41(1), 36–44.

Maltz, E., & Schein, S. (2012). Cultivating shared value initiatives: A three Cs approach. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 47, 55–74.

Matos, S., & Silvestre, B. S. (2013). Managing stakeholder relations when developing sustainable business models: The case of the Brazilian energy sector. Journal of Cleaner Production, 45(20), 61–73.

Meehan, J., Meehan, K., & Richards, A. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: The 3C-SR model. International Journal of Social Economics, 33(5/6), 386–398.

Minkoff, D. C. (2002). The emergence of hybrid organizational forms: Combining identity-based service provision and political action. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 31(3), 377–401.

Montabon, F., Pagell, M., & Wu, Z. (2016). Making sustainability sustainable. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 52(2), 11–27.

Moore, D., Cranston, G., Reed, A., & Galli, A. (2012). Projecting future human demand on the Earth’s regenerative capacity. Ecological Indicators, 16, 3–10.

Murphy, P. J., & Coombes, S. M. (2009). A model of social entrepreneurial discovery. Journal of Business Ethics, 87, 325–336.

Naude, W., Santos-Paulino, A., & McGillivray, M. (2009). Measuring vulnerability: An overview and introduction, oxford development studies. Taylor & Francis Journals, 37(3), 183–191.

Norman, W., & MacDonald, C. (2004). Getting to the bottom of ‘triple bottom line. Business Ethics Quarterly, 14(2), 243–262.

Normann, R., Ramirez, R. (1993). From value chain to value constellation: Designing interactive strategy. Harvard Business Review, 71(July/Aug), 65–77.

Pache, A. C., & Santos, F. (2012). Inside the hybrid organization: selective coupling as a response to competing institutional logics. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 972–1001.

Pagell, M., & Wu, Z. (2009). Building a more complete theory of sustainable supply chain management using case studies of 10 exemplars. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 45(2), 37–56.

Peteraf, M. A. (1993). The cornerstones of competitive advantage: a resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 14(3), 179–191.

Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy and society. The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78–92.

Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review, 89(1/2), 62–77.

Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68(3), 79–91.

Rotheroe, N. C., & Miller, L. (2008). Innovation in social enterprise: Achieving a user participation model. Social Enterprise Journal, 4(3), 242–260.

Santos, F. M. (2012). A positive theory of social entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Ethics, 111, 335–351.

Searcy, C. (2012). Corporate sustainability performance measurement systems: A review and research agenda. Journal of Business Ethics, 107(3), 239–253.

Selsky, J. W., & Parker, B. (2005). Cross-sector partnerships to address social issues: Challenges to theory and practice. Journal of Management, 31(6), 849–873.

Serenko, A., & Bontis, N. (2009). A citation-based ranking of the business ethics scholarly journals. International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics, 4(4), 390–399.

Spear, R., Moreau, C., & Mertens, S. (2013). Managers’ competences in social enterprises: Which specificities? Social Enterprise Journal, 9(2), 164–183.

Tate, W. L., Ellram, L. M., & Kirchoff, J. F. (2010). Corporate social responsibility reports: A thematic analysis related to supply chain management. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 46(1), 19–44.

Teece, D. J., Pisano, A., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.

Thake, S., & Zadek, S. (1997). Practical people, noble causes. How to support community based social entrepreneurs. London: New Economics Foundation.

Torugsa, N. A., O’Donohue, W., & Hecker, R. (2012). Capabilities, proactive CSR and financial performance in SMEs: Empirical evidence from an Australian manufacturing industry sector. Journal of Business Ethics, 109(4), 483–500.

Tracey, P., Phillips, N., & Jarvis, O. (2011). Bridging institutional entrepreneurship and the creation of new organizational forms: A multilevel model. Organization Science, 22, 60–80.

Wacker, J. G. (1998). A definition of theory: Research guidelines for different theory-building research methods in operations management. Journal of Operations Management, 16(4), 361–385.

Wagner, T., Lutz, R. J., & Weitz, B. A. (2009). Corporate hypocrisy: Overcoming the threat of inconsistent corporate social responsibility perceptions. Journal of Marketing, 73(6), 77–91.

Weerawardena, J., & Mort, G. S. (2006). Investigating social entrepreneurship: A multidimensional model. Journal of World Business, 41, 21–35.

Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171–180.

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.

World Bank (2015). Poverty overview. http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/poverty/overview#1. Accessed on May 31, 2015.

Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th edition). New York, NY: Sage.

YSB (2014), Yunus social business investors brochure, 1–16.

Yunus, M., Moingeon, B., & Lehmann-Ortega, L. (2010). Building social business models: Lessons from the Grameen experience. Long Range Planning, 43(2), 308–325.

Zahra, S. A., Gedajlovic, E., Neubaum, D. O., & Shulman, J. M. (2009). A typology of social entrepreneurs: motives, search processes and ethical challenges. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(5), 519–532.

Titel: Achieving Shared Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Value Creation: Toward a Social Resource-Based View (SRBV) of the Firm
verfasst von: Wendy L. Tate
Lydia Bals
Publikationsdatum: 18.10.2016
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in: Journal of Business Ethics / Ausgabe 3/2018
Print ISSN: 0167-4544
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-0697
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3344-y

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2018

Value Added as part of Sustainability Reporting: Reporting on Distributional Fairness or Obfuscation?

Sustainable Human Resource Management with Salience of Stakeholders: A Top Management Perspective

A Resource-Based View of Social Entrepreneurship: How Stewardship Culture Benefits Scale of Social Impact

Is the Grass Greener on the Other Side? A Review of the Asia-Pacific Sport Industry’s Environmental Sustainability Practices

Seize the Day or Save the World? The Importance of Ethical Claims and Product Nature Congruity

Green Consumption Practices Among Young Environmentalists: A Practice Theory Perspective