IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i21p9267-d441606.html

The Symbiotic Bond of Income Equality and Organizational Equilibrium

Author

Listed:
  • Vicente Roca-Puig

    (Department of Business Administration and Marketing, Faculty of Law and Economic Sciences, Universitat Jaume I, 12071 Castellón, Spain)

Abstract

The corporate sustainability literature postulates that companies are social entities that constantly interact with the society in which they are located. Although this idea is generally accepted, one persistent research gap in this field relates to testing this connection through quantitative empirical studies. In this study, we shed light on the bidirectional relationship between income inequality and organizational equilibrium (i.e., balance in the employment relationship). From data on 2525 companies covering a nine-year period and using longitudinal structural equation modeling, findings demonstrate that equity in the distribution of resources among people in a society positively influences equity in the distribution of resources between employer and employees, and vice versa. A symbiotic union of mutual benefit between society and business is, therefore, developed over time. Theoretical and practical implications of our findings are presented.

Suggested Citation

  • Vicente Roca-Puig, 2020. "The Symbiotic Bond of Income Equality and Organizational Equilibrium," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-14, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:21:p:9267-:d:441606
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/21/9267/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/21/9267/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mario Piacentini, 2014. "Measuring Income Inequality and Poverty at the Regional Level in OECD Countries," OECD Statistics Working Papers 2014/3, OECD Publishing.
    2. Alejandro Padilla-Rivera & Sara Russo-Garrido & Nicolas Merveille, 2020. "Addressing the Social Aspects of a Circular Economy: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-17, September.
    3. Efrat Eizenberg & Yosef Jabareen, 2017. "Social Sustainability: A New Conceptual Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-16, January.
    4. Ralf Wilden & Jan Hohberger & Timothy M. Devinney & Fabrice Lumineau, 2019. "60 Years of March and Simon’s Organizations: An Empirical Examination of its Impact and Influence on Subsequent Research," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(8), pages 1570-1604, December.
    5. N. Venkatraman, 1990. "Performance Implications Of Strategic Coalignment: A Methodological Perspective," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(1), pages 19-41, January.
    6. Anca-Maria Clipa & Cătălin-Ioan Clipa & Magdalena Danileț & Andreia Gabriela Andrei, 2019. "Enhancing Sustainable Employment Relationships: An Empirical Investigation of the Influence of Trust in Employer and Subjective Value in Employment Contract Negotiations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-16, September.
    7. Sanjay Sharma & Audun Ruud, 2003. "On the path to sustainability: integrating social dimensions into the research and practice of environmental management," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(4), pages 205-214, July.
    8. Francesco Perrini & Antonio Tencati, 2006. "Sustainability and stakeholder management: the need for new corporate performance evaluation and reporting systems," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(5), pages 296-308, September.
    9. Federico Cosenz & Vinicius Picanço Rodrigues & Francesco Rosati, 2020. "Dynamic business modeling for sustainability: Exploring a system dynamics perspective to develop sustainable business models," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 651-664, February.
    10. Rolf Wolff, 1998. "Beyond environmental management—Perspectives on environmental and management research," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(5), pages 297-308, November.
    11. 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.
    12. Pratima Bansal, 2005. "Evolving sustainably: a longitudinal study of corporate sustainable development," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 197-218, 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. Ladislav Suhányi & Alžbeta Suhányiová & Jaroslava Kádárová & Jaroslava Janeková, 2023. "Relationships between Average Wages in the Manufacturing Sector and Economic Indicators of the Manufacturing Sector in the Region of Visegrad Group Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-19, 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. 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.
    2. Wing Chow & Yang Chen, 2012. "Corporate Sustainable Development: Testing a New Scale Based on the Mainland Chinese Context," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 105(4), pages 519-533, February.
    3. Robin Hogrefe & Sabine Bohnet-Joschko, 2023. "The Social Dimension of Corporate Sustainability: Review of an Evolving Research Field," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-22, February.
    4. Markus Beckmann & Stefan Hielscher & Ingo Pies, 2014. "Commitment Strategies for Sustainability: How Business Firms Can Transform Trade‐Offs Into Win–Win Outcomes," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 18-37, January.
    5. Joanne Meehan & David Bryde, 2011. "Sustainable procurement practice," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(2), pages 94-106, February.
    6. Simone Carmine & Valentina De Marchi, 2023. "Reviewing Paradox Theory in Corporate Sustainability Toward a Systems Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 184(1), pages 139-158, April.
    7. Fabien Martinez, 2014. "Corporate strategy and the environment: towards a four-dimensional compatibility model for fostering green management decisions," Post-Print hal-02887618, HAL.
    8. Nurisyal Muhamad & Sofiah Md Auzair & Amizawati Mohd Amir & Md Daud Ismail, 2016. "Measuring Sustainability Performance Measurement System," EuroEconomica, Danubius University of Galati, issue 3(12), pages 182-199, JUNE.
    9. Homeyra Khatami & Neda Abdolvand & Saeid Homayoun & Saeedeh Rajaei Harandi, 2025. "Sustainable Development and Corporate Profitability: Data Mining Approach," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 27(5), pages 1973-2000, October.
    10. Anselm Schneider, 2015. "Reflexivity in Sustainability Accounting and Management: Transcending the Economic Focus of Corporate Sustainability," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 127(3), pages 525-536, March.
    11. 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.
    12. Jianxin Ge & Tong Li, 2019. "Entrepreneurial Resources, Complementary Assets, and Platform Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-20, August.
    13. Morgan X. Yang & Ji Li & Irina Y. Yu & Kevin J. Zeng & Jian‐Min (James) Sun, 2019. "Environmentally sustainable or economically sustainable? The effect of Chinese manufacturing firms' corporate sustainable strategy on their green performances," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(6), pages 989-997, September.
    14. Tze San Ong & Boon Heng Teh & Ah Suat Lee, 2019. "Contingent Factors and Sustainable Performance Measurement (SPM) Practices of Malaysian Electronics and Electrical Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-33, February.
    15. May-Ching Ding & Yuan Shuh Lii & Kuan Fu Lai, 2025. "A great start? Sustainability mission statements affect consumer behavior," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 8631-8660, April.
    16. Lin Wu & Nachiappan Subramanian & Angappa Gunasekaran & Muhammad Dan‐Asabe Abdulrahman & Kulwant Singh Pawar & Des Doran, 2018. "A two‐dimensional, two‐level framework for achieving corporate sustainable development: Assessing the return on sustainability initiatives," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(8), pages 1117-1130, December.
    17. Anselm Schneider & Erika Meins, 2012. "Two Dimensions of Corporate Sustainability Assessment: Towards a Comprehensive Framework," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(4), pages 211-222, May.
    18. Hsiao-Yen Mao & Wen-Min Lu & Hsin-Yen Shieh, 2023. "Exploring the Influence of Environmental Investment on Multinational Enterprises’ Performance from the Sustainability and Marketability Efficiency Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-23, May.
    19. Muñoz, Pablo & Dimov, Dimo, 2015. "The call of the whole in understanding the development of sustainable ventures," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 632-654.
    20. Ivan Pribićević & Boris Delibašić, 2021. "Critical sustainability indicators identification and cause–effect relationships analysis for sustainable organization strategy based on fuzzy DEMATEL," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(12), pages 17263-17304, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:21:p:9267-:d:441606. 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.