IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/bstrat/v35y2026i3p3468-3483.html

Can Hybrid Organisations Solve the Paradox of the Triple Bottom Line, and Does It Need Solving?

Author

Listed:
  • Ruth Cherrington
  • Amanda Ayliffe
  • Danielle Farrow
  • Constantine Manolchev

Abstract

This study investigates how B Corp certification enables hybrid organisations to integrate competing institutional logics of market and social purpose. Through a two‐stage qualitative design combining cross‐sector interviews with B Corps and an in‐depth case study, with a total of 30 participants, we analyse how certification supports hybrid organisations in practice. Three mechanisms of logic integration are identified: blending commercial and social logics to craft synergistic value propositions, assimilating social concerns into core business operations and elaborating existing practices to embed sustainability. B Corp certification emerges as a mediating institutional infrastructure that legitimises hybridity through frameworks for continuous improvement, stakeholder accountability and community building, while simultaneously imposing operational demands. Findings underscore the importance of sophisticated tension management across decision‐making, resource allocation and performance evaluation. The study contributes by refining theory on hybrid organisations and reframing certification as an enabling–constraining scaffold that renders paradoxes manageable rather than resolvable.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruth Cherrington & Amanda Ayliffe & Danielle Farrow & Constantine Manolchev, 2026. "Can Hybrid Organisations Solve the Paradox of the Triple Bottom Line, and Does It Need Solving?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(3), pages 3468-3483, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:bstrat:v:35:y:2026:i:3:p:3468-3483
    DOI: 10.1002/bse.70272
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.70272
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/bse.70272?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:bstrat:v:35:y:2026:i:3:p:3468-3483. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1099-0836 .

    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.