Reflections on sustainability’s meaning in organizations

Main Article Content

Beatriz Lima Zanoni
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1381-9328
Samir Adamoglu de Oliveira
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4978-0557

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

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Article Details

How to Cite
ZANONI, B. L.; DE OLIVEIRA, S. A. Reflections on sustainability’s meaning in organizations . RAE - Revista de Administracao de Empresas , [S. l.], v. 63, n. 2, p. e2022–0028, 2023. DOI: 10.1590/S0034-759020230203. Disponível em: https://periodicos.fgv.br/rae/article/view/89180. Acesso em: 24 may. 2024.
Section
Articles

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

Artigos mais lidos escritos pelo mesmo(s) autor(es)