Are We All Willing and Able? Exploring the Intra-Organisational Dynamics of Substantive vs Symbolic Adoption of Sustainability Standards

Engineering notes

Key topics: autonomous driving. See the paper for implementation details and experimental results.

Chinese explanation / 中文解读

中文解读待补充：本站会优先为端到端自动驾驶、BEV感知、3D目标检测、轨迹预测、路径规划、LiDAR感知等高价值论文补充中文说明。

Original abstract

Abstract A large stream of studies has documented varying levels of adoption of sustainability standards (from the symbolic to the substantive), emphasising the organisational-level decoupling processes in the face of external normative pressures. Yet, such calls presuppose organisational actors consciously, collectively, and strategically articulate a modus operandi consistent with a decoupling approach. In this paper, we offer an alternative view by arguing that the extent to which sustainability standards are adopted resides at individual and group levels. Based on the case of a family-owned multinational company and relying on Durand et al.’s (2019) framing and social identity theory, we ask: how does social identity(ies) shape the willingness and ability to adopt (substantively or symbolically) sustainability standards? Following interviews with managers, a survey of employees, and a review of internal documents, the findings reveal that despite the group of sustainability promoters’ ability and willingness to adopt standards substantively, broader organisational change remained uneven. Specifically our findings suggest that organisational responses are likely to be symbolic when: (i) when individuals do not consider membership in the promoter group to be salient and are less likely to prioritise and internalise its norms and values over external ones; (ii) the promoters’ group does not assume the prototypical leadership role; (iii) there is little or no recognition of the presence of multiple social groups, each with their own distinct identities; (iv) ethical dilemmas (e.g., respecting subsidiaries’ autonomy versus enforcing alignment, and balancing sustainability values with fiduciary duties to shareholders) are not addressed. This paper contributes to the literature by cautioning against an oversimplification of judgments about symbolic versus substantive organisational responses.

Links and sources

• PDF from original source

Comments