IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i10p3432-d172180.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Architect, Catalyst, Advocate, and Prophet: A Four-Lens View of Companies to Support Ecodesign Integration

Author

Listed:
  • Raphaëlle Stewart

    (Division for Quantitative Sustainability Assessment, Department of Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Diplomvej, Bygning 371, 2800 Kongens Lyngby, Denmark
    Department of Design, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Kolbjørn Hejes Vei 2b, 7491 Trondheim, Norway)

  • Faheem Ali

    (Division for Quantitative Sustainability Assessment, Department of Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Diplomvej, Bygning 371, 2800 Kongens Lyngby, Denmark
    Department of Design, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Kolbjørn Hejes Vei 2b, 7491 Trondheim, Norway)

  • Casper Boks

    (Department of Design, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Kolbjørn Hejes Vei 2b, 7491 Trondheim, Norway)

  • Niki Bey

    (Division for Quantitative Sustainability Assessment, Department of Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Diplomvej, Bygning 371, 2800 Kongens Lyngby, Denmark)

Abstract

Companies are increasingly expected to develop products with better environmental performance throughout their life cycle. Academic literature on ecodesign integration, which investigates firms’ practices of dealing with environmental concerns associated with their products, indicates a need for more focus on formal and informal organizational aspects. From the general management literature, the four-lens view of organizations provides a rich understanding of organizations by embracing their formal (structural lens) and informal (human, political and symbolic lenses) functioning. This article aims to explore the extent to which the four-lens view may support ecodesign integration in companies. This exploratory study builds on fifteen interviews about ecodesign integration at seven manufacturing companies in Denmark and Norway. The main results are threefold: (i) the different lenses of organizations could be found in measures mentioned at the case companies; (ii) measures from the architect’s perspective seemed necessary to provide an official scene for ecodesign and help prioritizing it in organizations; and (iii) the catalyst’s, advocate’s, and prophet’s perspectives seemed necessary to facilitate or complement the architect’s perspective. In the light of these findings, the four-lens view seems relevant to strengthen ecodesign integration, and its potential use as a reflective tool is an avenue for future work.

Suggested Citation

  • Raphaëlle Stewart & Faheem Ali & Casper Boks & Niki Bey, 2018. "Architect, Catalyst, Advocate, and Prophet: A Four-Lens View of Companies to Support Ecodesign Integration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-27, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:10:p:3432-:d:172180
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/10/3432/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/10/3432/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marlen Gabriele Arnold & Kai Hockerts, 2011. "The greening dutchman: Philips' process of green flagging to drive sustainable innovations," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(6), pages 394-407, September.
    2. Raphaëlle Stewart & Peter Fantke & Anders Bjørn & Mikołaj Owsianiak & Christine Molin & Michael Zwicky Hauschild & Alexis Laurent, 2018. "Life cycle assessment in corporate sustainability reporting: Global, regional, sectoral, and company‐level trends," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(8), pages 1751-1764, December.
    3. Kristen Skelton & Rikke Dorothea Huulgaard & Kirsten Schmidt, 2016. "Understanding ecodesign through a communities of practice perspective," International Journal of Environmental Technology and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 19(1), pages 40-58.
    4. Elli Verhulst & Casper Boks, 2012. "The role of human factors in the adoption of sustainable design criteria in business: evidence from Belgian and Dutch case studies," International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 6(2), pages 146-163.
    5. Julien Boucher & Clotilde Jenny & Zara Plummer & Gerhard Schneider, 2018. "How to Avoid Pigeonholing the Environmental Manager?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-18, July.
    6. Rosa Dangelico & Devashish Pujari, 2010. "Mainstreaming Green Product Innovation: Why and How Companies Integrate Environmental Sustainability," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 95(3), pages 471-486, September.
    7. Marcel C. Hollander & Conny A. Bakker & Erik Jan Hultink, 2017. "Product Design in a Circular Economy: Development of a Typology of Key Concepts and Terms," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 21(3), pages 517-525, June.
    8. Martina K. Linnenluecke & Sally V. Russell & Andrew Griffiths, 2009. "Subcultures and sustainability practices: the impact on understanding corporate sustainability," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(7), pages 432-452, November.
    9. Taylor, Frederick Winslow, 1911. "The Principles of Scientific Management," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, number taylor1911.
    10. Vinícius P. Rodrigues & Daniela C. A. Pigosso & Jakob W. Andersen & Tim C. McAloone, 2018. "Evaluating the Potential Business Benefits of Ecodesign Implementation: A Logic Model Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-26, June.
    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. Faheem Ali & Raphaëlle Stewart & Casper Boks & Niki Bey, 2019. "Exploring “Company Personas” for Informing Design for Sustainability Implementation in Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-30, January.
    2. Fabio Neves Puglieri & Aldo Roberto Ometto & Rodrigo Salvador & Murillo Vetroni Barros & Cassiano Moro Piekarski & Izabella Morré Rodrigues & Octavio Diegoli Netto, 2020. "An Environmental and Operational Analysis of Quality Function Deployment-Based Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-18, April.

    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. Stanley Kam Sing Wong, 2013. "Environmental Requirements, Knowledge Sharing and Green Innovation: Empirical Evidence from the Electronics Industry in China," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(5), pages 321-338, July.
    2. Lahcene Makhloufi & Abderrazak Ahmed Laghouag & Tang Meirun & Fateh Belaid, 2022. "Impact of green entrepreneurship orientation on environmental performance: The natural resource‐based view and environmental policy perspective," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 425-444, January.
    3. Phil Brown & Nancy Bocken & Ruud Balkenende, 2019. "Why Do Companies Pursue Collaborative Circular Oriented Innovation?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-23, January.
    4. Faheem Ali & Raphaëlle Stewart & Casper Boks & Niki Bey, 2019. "Exploring “Company Personas” for Informing Design for Sustainability Implementation in Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-30, January.
    5. Liang Li & Hajar Msaad & Huaping Sun & Mei Xuen Tan & Yeqing Lu & Antonio K.W. Lau, 2020. "Green Innovation and Business Sustainability: New Evidence from Energy Intensive Industry in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-18, October.
    6. Rosa Maria Dangelico, 2016. "Green Product Innovation: Where we are and Where we are Going," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(8), pages 560-576, December.
    7. René Bohnsack & Ans Kolk & Jonatan Pinkse & Christina M. Bidmon, 2020. "Driving the electric bandwagon: The dynamics of incumbents' sustainable innovation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 727-743, February.
    8. Alina Mirela Teacu (Parincu), 2019. "Neuromanagement – the Impact of Neuroscience on the Organizational Performance," Risk in Contemporary Economy, "Dunarea de Jos" University of Galati, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, pages 487-493.
    9. Sofie Hagejärd & Anita Ollár & Paula Femenías & Ulrike Rahe, 2020. "Designing for Circularity—Addressing Product Design, Consumption Practices and Resource Flows in Domestic Kitchens," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-20, January.
    10. Giada Baldessarelli & Nathalie Lazaric & Michele Pezzoni, 2022. "Organizational routines: Evolution in the research landscape of two core communities," Post-Print halshs-03718851, HAL.
    11. Michel Anteby & Curtis K. Chan, 2018. "A Self-Fulfilling Cycle of Coercive Surveillance: Workers’ Invisibility Practices and Managerial Justification," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 247-263, April.
    12. Katsuyuki Nakano & Ken Yamagishi, 2021. "Impact of Carbon Tax Increase on Product Prices in Japan," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-19, April.
    13. David Vallat, 2015. "Une alternative au dualisme État-Marché : l’économie collaborative, questions pratiques et épistémologiques," Working Papers halshs-01249308, HAL.
    14. Jeremy Atack & Robert A. Margo & Paul Rhode, 2020. "‘Mechanization Takes Command’: Inanimate Power and Labor Productivity in Late Nineteenth Century American Manufacturing," NBER Working Papers 27436, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Zhang, Yibin & Hafezi, Maryam & Zhao, Xuan & Shi, Victor, 2017. "Reprint of “The impact of development cost on product line design and its environmental performance”," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 126-134.
    16. Ethan Ilzetzki & Saverio Simonelli, 2017. "Measuring Productivity Dispersion: Lessons From Counting One-Hundred Million Ballots," CSEF Working Papers 483, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.
    17. Ki‐Hoon Lee & Ji‐Whan Kim, 2011. "Integrating Suppliers into Green Product Innovation Development: an Empirical Case Study in the Semiconductor Industry," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(8), pages 527-538, December.
    18. Alpenberg, Jan & Paul Scarbrough, D., 2018. "Trust and control in changing production environments," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 527-534.
    19. Fracarolli Nunes, Mauro & Lee Park, Camila & Shin, Hyunju, 2021. "Corporate social and environmental irresponsibilities in supply chains, contamination, and damage of intangible resources: A behavioural approach," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    20. François Silva & Charles-Philippe Mourgues, 2020. "Les managers : mercenaires ou missionnaires," Post-Print hal-03083893, HAL.

    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:10:y:2018:i:10:p:3432-:d:172180. 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.