IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/mlucee/200714.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Wie können Corporate Citizens im Global Compact voneinander lernen? Bedingungen, Hemmnisse und Bewertungskriterien

Author

Listed:
  • Campe, Sabine
  • Rieth, Lothar

Abstract

Der UN Global Compact hat sich das Ziel gesetzt, die gesellschaftliche Verantwortung von Unternehmen zu fördern. Die Partnerschaft zwischen den Vereinten Nationen und Unternehmen versteht sich vornehmlich als Lernplattform, welche Unternehmen nutzen können, um sich über Maßnahmen zu ihrer gesellschaftlichen Verantwortung (Corporate Social Responsibility) auszutauschen und voneinander zu lernen. Wie jedoch kann beurteilt werden, ob der Global Compact Lernprozesse erfolgreich angestoßen hat, und wie kann er solche in Zukunft fördern? Dieses Papier fragt, unter welchen Bedingungen der Global Compact Lernprozesse bei den Unternehmen unterstützen kann. Hierzu werden Annahmen aus Theorien des organisationalen Lernens abgleitet und anhand von Erfahrungen von Unternehmen im deutschen Global Compact Netzwerk skizziert. So wird zwischen Formen des Single Loops und Double Loops Lernen unterschieden, zwischen der einfachen Verhaltensanpassung bei gleich bleibenden Zielen und der Überarbeitung der leitenden Normen und Ziele. Es wird argumentiert, dass einfache Verhaltensanpassungen durch klare positive Anreize und Transparenz gefördert und tief greifende Veränderungen der Unternehmensziele durch vertrauensvollen Dialog unterstützt werden können...

Suggested Citation

  • Campe, Sabine & Rieth, Lothar, 2007. "Wie können Corporate Citizens im Global Compact voneinander lernen? Bedingungen, Hemmnisse und Bewertungskriterien," Discussion Papers 2007-14, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:mlucee:200714
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/170289/1/dp2007-14.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brinkmann-Braun, Johanna & Pies, Ingo, 2007. "The global compact's contribution to global governance revisited," Discussion Papers 2007-10, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    2. Grant, Ruth W. & Keohane, Robert O., 2005. "Accountability and Abuses of Power in World Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 99(1), pages 29-43, February.
    3. Checkel, Jeffrey T., 2001. "Why Comply? Social Learning and European Identity Change," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(3), pages 553-588, July.
    4. March, James G. & Olsen, Johan P., 1998. "The Institutional Dynamics of International Political Orders," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 52(4), pages 943-969, October.
    5. Guido Palazzo & Andreas Scherer, 2006. "Corporate Legitimacy as Deliberation: A Communicative Framework," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 66(1), pages 71-88, June.
    6. Pies, Ingo & Beckmann, Markus & Hielscher, Stefan, 2007. "Mind the Gap! - Ordonomische Überlegungen zur Sozialstruktur und Semantik moderner Governance," Discussion Papers 2007-16, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Andreas Rasche, 2009. "Toward a model to compare and analyze accountability standards – the case of the UN Global Compact," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 192-205, July.
    2. May-Britt Stumbaum, 2015. "The diffusion of norms in security-related fields: views from China, India and the EU," Asia Europe Journal, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 331-347, September.
    3. Tanja A. Börzel & Thomas Risse, 2009. "Diffusing (Inter-) Regionalism - The EU as a Model of Regional Integration," KFG Working Papers p0007, Free University Berlin.
    4. Jasper Krommendijk, 2015. "The domestic effectiveness of international human rights monitoring in established democracies. The case of the UN human rights treaty bodies," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 489-512, December.
    5. Mitchell, Ronald B., 2011. "Transparency for governance: The mechanisms and effectiveness of disclosure-based and education-based transparency policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1882-1890, September.
    6. Tarald Gulseth Berge & Øyvind Stiansen, 2023. "Bureaucratic capacity and preference attainment in international economic negotiations," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 467-498, July.
    7. Brent B Allred & Michael G Findley & Daniel Nielson & J C Sharman, 2017. "Anonymous shell companies: A global audit study and field experiment in 176 countries," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 48(5), pages 596-619, July.
    8. Maria Pawelec & Sonja Grimm, 2014. "Does National Identity Matter? Political Conditionality and the Crucial Case of Serbia's (Non‐)Co‐operation with the ICTY," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(6), pages 1290-1306, November.
    9. Meng-Hsuan Chou & Marianne Riddervold, 2015. "The Unexpected Negotiator at the Table: How the European Commission’s Expertise Informs Intergovernmental EU Policies," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 3(1), pages 61-72.
    10. Benjamin Martill & Uta Staiger, 2021. "Negotiating Brexit: The Cultural Sources of British Hard Bargaining," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(2), pages 261-277, March.
    11. Philip Schleifer & Matteo Fiorini & Graeme Auld, 2019. "Transparency in transnational governance: The determinants of information disclosure of voluntary sustainability programs," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(4), pages 488-506, December.
    12. Tanja E. Aalberts, 2005. "Sovereignty Reloaded? A Constructivist Perspective on European Research," The Constitutionalism Web-Papers p0010, University of Hamburg, Faculty for Economics and Social Sciences, Department of Social Sciences, Institute of Political Science.
    13. Liam Clegg, 2012. "Global governance behind closed doors: The IMF boardroom, the Enhanced Structural Adjustment Facility, and the intersection of material power and norm stabilisation in global politics," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 285-308, September.
    14. Tanja A. Börzel & Thomas Risse, 2009. "The Transformative Power of Europe: The European Union and the Diffusion of Ideas," KFG Working Papers p0001, Free University Berlin.
    15. Florence Dafe & Rebecca Elisabeth Husebye Engebretsen, 2023. "Tussle for space: The politics of mock‐compliance with global financial standards in developing countries," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(2), pages 328-345, April.
    16. Koch, Svea, 2015. "A Typology of Political Conditionality Beyond Aid: Conceptual Horizons Based on Lessons from the European Union," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 97-108.
    17. Philip Schleifer & Matteo Fiorini & Graeme Auld, 2017. "Transparency in Transnational Sustainability Governance: A Multivariate Analysis of Regulatory Standard-Setting Programs," RSCAS Working Papers 2017/16, European University Institute.
    18. Rachel Epstein, 2003. "The Internationalization of Finance and Defense in Postcommunist Poland," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 2, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    19. Vitaliy Roud & Thomas Wolfgang Thurner, 2018. "The Influence of State‐Ownership on Eco‐Innovations in Russian Manufacturing Firms," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 22(5), pages 1213-1227, October.
    20. Irene Chu & Mai Chi Vu, 2022. "The Nature of the Self, Self-regulation and Moral Action: Implications from the Confucian Relational Self and Buddhist Non-self," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 180(1), pages 245-262, September.

    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:zbw:mlucee:200714. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wwhalde.html .

    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.