Reflections on sustainability’s meaning in organizations
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
We undertake an institutionalist reflection on the construction of the meaning(s) of sustainability as a legitimizing factor for organizations, arguing that the polysemic construction of the concept is linguistically operated intending legitimation in heterogeneous organizational fields. We apply the semiotic model of the institutionalization process to the sustainability concept, highlighting its linguistic-social construction in two ways – denotational and connotational –, discussing the departure from the objective nature of the concept to its mythicalrational
nature in which the decoupling of doing, saying and meaning, transmute its semantic content. Sustainability is, then, understood as another institutional pressure to which organizations need to respond, and they usually do so strategically, through acceptance, adaptation or contestation. Thus, even if certain actors aim to denotationally institutionalize sustainability, its meaning fluctuates connotationally as it is widespread, due to convenience or lack of clarity on how to operationalize it in organizations.
Downloads
Metrics
Article Details
A RAE compromete-se a contribuir com a proteção dos direitos intelectuais do autor. Nesse sentido:
- adota a licença Creative Commoms BY (CC-BY) em todos os textos que publica, exceto quando houver indicação de específicos detentores dos direitos autorais e patrimoniais;
- adota software de detecção de similaridades;
- adota ações de combate ao plagio e má conduta ética, alinhada às diretrizes do Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
References
Brannen, M. Y. (2004). When Mickey loses face: Recontextualization, semantic fit, and the semiotics of foreignness. Academy of Management Review, 29(4), 593-616. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/20159073
Bromley, P., & Powell, W. (2012). From smoke and mirrors to walking the talk: Decoupling in the contemporary world. Academy of Management Annals, 6(1), 483-530. doi: https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2012.684462
Chapman, G., Cully, A., Kosiol, J., Macht, S., Chapman, R., Fitzgerald, J., & Gertsen, F. (2020). The wicked problem of measuring real-world research impact: Using sustainable development goals (SDGs) and targets in academia. Journal of Management & Organization, 26(6), 1030-1047. doi: https://doi:10.1017/jmo.2020.16
Cobley, P. (2010). Introduction. In P. Cobley (Ed.), Routledge companion to semiotics (pp. 3-12). New York, USA: Routledge.
Cobley, P. (2016). Semiotics. In K. B. Jensen, & R. T. Craig (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of communication theory and philosophy, (pp. 1-11). John Wiley & Sons. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118766804.wbiect146
Deephouse, D. L., Bundy, J., Tost, L. P., & Suchman, M. C. (2017). Organizational legitimacy: Six key questions. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, T. Lawrence, & R. Meyer (Eds.), SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 27-54). London, UK: Sage Publications.
Delmas, M. A., & Toffel, M. W. (2011). Institutional pressures and organizational characteristics: Implications for environmental strategy. In P. Bansal, & A. J. Hoffman (Eds.), Oxford handbook of business and the natural environment (pp. 229-247). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Dovers, S. R. (1996). Sustainability: Demands on policy. Journal of Public Policy, 16(3), 303-318. doi: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4007649
Gladwin, T., Kennelly, J., & Krause, T. (1995). Shifting paradigms for sustainable development: Implications for management theory and research. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 878-907. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/258959
Gümüsay, A. A., Claus, L., & Amis, J. (2020). Engaging with grand challenges: An institutional logics perspective. Organization Theory, 1, 1-20. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/2631787720960487
Haack, P., & Rasche, A. (2021). The legitimacy of sustainability standards: A paradox perspective. Organization Theory, 2(4), 1-25. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/26317877211049493
Haack, P., Schilke, O., & Zucker, L. (2021). Legitimacy revisited: Disentangling propriety, validity, and consensus. Journal of Management Studies, 58(3), 749-781. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12615
Hoffman, A. J., & Jennings, P. D. (2015). Institutional theory and the natural environment: Research in (and on) the anthropocene. Organization & Environment, 28(1), 8-31. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026615575331
Hopwood, B., Mellor, M., & O’Brien, G. (2005). Sustainable development: Mapping different approaches. Sustainable Development, 13(1), 38-52. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.244
Jennings, P. D., & Hoffman, A. J. (2017). Institutional theory and the natural environment: Building research through tensions and paradoxes. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, T. Lawrence, & R. Meyer (Eds.), SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 759-785). London, UK: Sage Publications.
Jennings, P. D., & Zandbergen, P. A. (1995). Ecologically sustainable organizations: An institutional approach. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 1015-1052. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/258964
Jensen, K. B. (2015). Semiotics. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (Vol. 21, 2a ed., pp. 592-597). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.95033-5
Li, Y. (2017). A semiotic theory of institutionalization. Academy of Management Review, 42(3), 520-547. doi: https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2014.0274
Lounsbury, M., Fairclough, S., & Lee, M. P. (2011). Institutional approaches to organizations and the natural environment. In P. Bansal, & A. J. Hoffman (Eds.), Oxford handbook of business and the natural environment (pp. 211-228). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Lounsbury, M., Steele, C. W., Wang, M. S., & Toubiana, M. (2021). New directions in the study of institutional logics: From tools to phenomena. Annual Review of Sociology, 47, 261-280. doi: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-090320-111734
Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 145-179. doi: https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1991.4279002
Parrique, T., Barth, J., Briens, F., Kerschner, C., Kraus-Polk, A., Kuokkanen, A., & Spangenberg, J. H. (2019). Decoupling debunked: Evidence and arguments against green growth as a sole strategy for sustainability. European Environmental Bureau. Recuperado de eeb.org/decoupling-debunked
Phillips, N., & Malhotra, N. (2017). Language, cognition and institutions: Studying institutionalization using linguistic methods. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, T. Lawrence, & R. Meyer (Eds.), SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 392-417). London, UK: Sage Publications.
Scherer, A. G., Palazzo, G., & Seidl, D. (2013). Managing legitimacy in complex and heterogeneous environments: Sustainable development in a globalized world. Journal of Management Studies, 50(2), 259-284. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12014
Suddaby, R., Bitektine, A., & Haack, P. (2017). Legitimacy. Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 451-478. doi: https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2015.0101
Vadén, T., Lähde, V., Majava, A., Järvensivu, P., Toivanen, T., Hakala, E., & Eronen, J. T. (2020). Decoupling for ecological sustainability: A categorisation and review of research literature. Environmental Science & Policy, 112, 236-244. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2020.06.016
Wæraas, A., & Nielsen, J. A. (2016). Translation theory ‘translated’: Three perspectives on translation in organizational research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 18, 236-270. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12092
Wedlin, L., & Sahlin, K. (2017). The imitation and translation of management ideas. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, T. Lawrence, & R. Meyer (Eds.), SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 102-127). London, UK: Sage Publications. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446280669.n16
