IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v9y2017i2p188-d89280.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Analysis of the Contribution of Japanese Business Terms to Corporate Sustainability: Learnings from the “Looking-Glass” of the East

Author

Listed:
  • Rodrigo Lozano

    (Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, University of Gavle, Gavle 801 76, Sweden
    Organisational Sustainability Ltd., Cardiff CF11 6EQ, UK)

  • Masachika Suzuki

    (Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies, Sophia University, Tokyo 102-8554, Japan)

  • Angela Carpenter

    (Organisational Sustainability Ltd., Cardiff CF11 6EQ, UK
    School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK)

  • Olga Tyunina

    (Graduate School of Frontier Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Chiba 277-8563, Japan)

Abstract

During the last decade, there has been increasing research on Corporate Sustainability, whereby most of such research was undertaken in the Western world. This paper is aimed at analysing the contribution of Japanese Business terms to Corporate Sustainability. The paper analyses, using Grounded Theory, 28 Japanese business terms through a Corporate Sustainability framework based on the four dimensions of sustainability (economic, environmental, social, and time), the company system (operations and processes, strategy and management, organisational systems, procurement and marketing, and assessment and communication), and stakeholders (internal, interconnecting, and external). The underpinning principles of the Japanese business terms provide complementary approaches to Western views on corporate sustainability by offering a more holistic perspective by linking the company system and its stakeholders to the four dimensions of sustainability. The paper proposes that Corporate Sustainability can learn from Japanese business approaches through: (1) the interaction and alignment of the factory, the firm, and inter-firm network; (2) the relationships between management and employees; (3) the inter-linkages between the company system elements; and (4) how Japanese companies remained competitive, even under the stress of a long-term major economic crisis. However, the analysis indicates that the relationship with external stakeholders and communicating with them through assessment and reporting is lacking in Japanese business management practice. Japanese businesses and their management can also learn from the Corporate Sustainability of the West by: (1) considering the four dimensions of sustainability and how they interact; (2) taking a holistic and systemic approach to Corporate Sustainability; (3) engaging in more Corporate Sustainability research; and (4) making Corporate Sustainability part of a company’s culture and activities. Businesses in the East and the West need to recognise that they can both contribute to making the world more sustainable by learning from each other’s approaches on Corporate Sustainability and adapting them to their own contexts.

Suggested Citation

  • Rodrigo Lozano & Masachika Suzuki & Angela Carpenter & Olga Tyunina, 2017. "An Analysis of the Contribution of Japanese Business Terms to Corporate Sustainability: Learnings from the “Looking-Glass” of the East," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-17, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:2:p:188-:d:89280
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/2/188/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/2/188/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carroll, Archie B., 1991. "The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 39-48.
    2. Bohnsack, René & Pinkse, Jonatan & Kolk, Ans, 2014. "Business models for sustainable technologies: Exploring business model evolution in the case of electric vehicles," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 284-300.
    3. Alexander Styhre, 2001. "Kaizen, Ethics, and Care of the Operations: Management After Empowerment," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(6), pages 795-810, September.
    4. Susan Isenberg, 2010. "Merging Education and Business Models to Create and Sustain Transformational Change," International Journal of Adult Vocational Education and Technology (IJAVET), IGI Global, vol. 1(4), pages 31-47, October.
    5. Julie A Nelson, 2004. "A Buddhist and Feminist Analysis of Ethics and Business," Development, Palgrave Macmillan;Society for International Deveopment, vol. 47(3), pages 53-60, September.
    6. Beattie, Vivien & Smith, Sarah Jane, 2013. "Value creation and business models: Refocusing the intellectual capital debate," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 243-254.
    7. Julie A. Nelson, "undated". "Beyond Small-Is-Beautiful: A Buddhist and Feminist Analysis of Ethics and Business," GDAE Working Papers 04-01, GDAE, Tufts University.
    8. Rodrigo Lozano, 2013. "Are Companies Planning their Organisational Changes for Corporate Sustainability? An Analysis of Three Case Studies on Resistance to Change and their Strategies to Overcome it," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(5), pages 275-295, September.
    9. Farris, Jennifer A. & Van Aken, Eileen M. & Doolen, Toni L. & Worley, June, 2009. "Critical success factors for human resource outcomes in Kaizen events: An empirical study," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 42-65, January.
    10. R. Edward Freeman & Andrew C. Wicks & Bidhan Parmar, 2004. "Stakeholder Theory and “The Corporate Objective Revisited”," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 364-369, June.
    11. Giles Atkinson, 2000. "Measuring Corporate Sustainability," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(2), pages 235-252.
    12. Thomas Dyllick & Kai Hockerts, 2002. "Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(2), pages 130-141, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jung Eon Kwon & Hyung Rok Woo, 2017. "The Impact of Flipped Learning on Cooperative and Competitive Mindsets," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-15, December.
    2. Lidia Sanchez-Ruiz & Beatriz Blanco & Juan A. Marin-Garcia & Elsa Diez-Busto, 2020. "Scoping Review of Kaizen and Green Practices: State of the Art and Future Directions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-19, November.
    3. María Jesús Muñoz‐Torres & María Ángeles Fernández‐Izquierdo & Juana M. Rivera‐Lirio & Elena Escrig‐Olmedo, 2019. "Can environmental, social, and governance rating agencies favor business models that promote a more sustainable development?," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(2), pages 439-452, March.
    4. Rodrigo Lozano, 2020. "Analysing the use of tools, initiatives, and approaches to promote sustainability in corporations," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(2), pages 982-998, March.
    5. Gheorghe H. Popescu & Adriana Ana Maria Davidescu & Catalin Huidumac, 2018. "Researching the Main Causes of the Romanian Shadow Economy at the Micro and Macro Levels: Implications for Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-37, September.
    6. Rodrigo Lozano, 2018. "Sustainable business models: Providing a more holistic perspective," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(8), pages 1159-1166, December.
    7. Tom Lahti & Joakim Wincent & Vinit Parida, 2018. "A Definition and Theoretical Review of the Circular Economy, Value Creation, and Sustainable Business Models: Where Are We Now and Where Should Research Move in the Future?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-19, August.
    8. Thanh-Lam Nguyen, 2019. "STEAM-ME: A Novel Model for Successful Kaizen Implementation and Sustainable Performance of SMEs in Vietnam," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-23, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Witjes, Sjors & Lozano, Rodrigo, 2016. "Towards a more Circular Economy: Proposing a framework linking sustainable public procurement and sustainable business models," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 37-44.
    2. Rodrigo Lozano, 2020. "Analysing the use of tools, initiatives, and approaches to promote sustainability in corporations," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(2), pages 982-998, March.
    3. Rodrigo Lozano, 2018. "Proposing a Definition and a Framework of Organisational Sustainability: A Review of Efforts and a Survey of Approaches to Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-21, April.
    4. Thanh-Lam Nguyen, 2019. "STEAM-ME: A Novel Model for Successful Kaizen Implementation and Sustainable Performance of SMEs in Vietnam," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-23, February.
    5. Christian Felber & Vanessa Campos & Joan R. Sanchis, 2019. "The Common Good Balance Sheet, an Adequate Tool to Capture Non-Financials?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-23, July.
    6. Teik Aun Wong & Mohammad Reevany Bustami, 2020. "A Case Study of Micro Businesses in Jelutong Wet Market in Penang, Malaysia: Implications for CSR Scholarship," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 165(3), pages 535-546, September.
    7. Rodrigo Lozano, 2018. "Sustainable business models: Providing a more holistic perspective," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(8), pages 1159-1166, December.
    8. Jongmoo Jay Choi & Hoje Jo & Jimi Kim & Moo Sung Kim, 2018. "Business Groups and Corporate Social Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 153(4), pages 931-954, December.
    9. Mara Del Baldo & Maria-Gabriella Baldarelli, 2017. "Renewing and improving the business model toward sustainability in theory and practice," International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 1-13, December.
    10. Nir Halevy & Sora Jun & Eileen Y. Chou, 2020. "Intergroup Conflict is Our Business: CEOs’ Ethical Intergroup Leadership Fuels Stakeholder Support for Corporate Intergroup Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 162(1), pages 229-246, February.
    11. Lamin B. Ceesay, 2020. "Exploring the Influence of NGOs in Corporate Sustainability Adoption: Institutional-Legitimacy Perspective," Jindal Journal of Business Research, , vol. 9(2), pages 135-147, December.
    12. Yuan-Shuh Lii & May-Ching Ding & Chih-Huang Lin, 2018. "Fair or Unfair: The Moderating Effect of Sustainable CSR Practices on Anticipatory Justice Following Service Failure Recovery," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-21, December.
    13. Maria Järlström & Essi Saru & Sinikka Vanhala, 2018. "Sustainable Human Resource Management with Salience of Stakeholders: A Top Management Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 152(3), pages 703-724, October.
    14. Galbreath, Jeremy, 2017. "Drivers Of Environmental Sustainability In Wine Firms: The Role And Effect Of Women In Leadership," Working Papers 253851, American Association of Wine Economists.
    15. Tobias Hahn & Mandy Scheermesser, 2006. "Approaches to corporate sustainability among German companies," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(3), pages 150-165, July.
    16. Manuel Branco & Lúcia Rodrigues, 2006. "Corporate Social Responsibility and Resource-Based Perspectives," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 69(2), pages 111-132, December.
    17. Tobias Hahn & Frank Figge & Jonatan Pinkse & Lutz Preuss, 2010. "Trade‐offs in corporate sustainability: you can't have your cake and eat it," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(4), pages 217-229, May.
    18. Figge, Frank & Hahn, Tobias, 2004. "Sustainable Value Added--measuring corporate contributions to sustainability beyond eco-efficiency," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 173-187, February.
    19. Dhir, Amandeep & Khan, Sher Jahan & Islam, Nazrul & Ractham, Peter & Meenakshi, N., 2023. "Drivers of sustainable business model innovations. An upper echelon theory perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    20. Christina Deselaers & Alina Dahmen & Sonia Lippke, 2022. "Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on CSR Activities of Healthcare Providers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-27, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:2:p:188-:d:89280. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.