IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v148y2018i2d10.1007_s10551-017-3584-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Unsustainability of Sustainability: Cognitive Frames and Tensions in Bottom of the Pyramid Projects

Author

Listed:
  • Garima Sharma

    (University of New Mexico)

  • Anand Kumar Jaiswal

    (Indian Institute of Management)

Abstract

Existing research posits that decision makers use specific cognitive frames to manage tensions in sustainability. However, we know less about how the cognitive frames of individuals at different levels in organization interact and what these interactions imply for managing sustainability tensions, such as in Bottom of the Pyramid (BOP) projects. To address this omission, we ask do organizational and project leaders differ in their understanding of tensions in a BOP project, and if so, how? We answer this question by drawing on a 5-year study of a BOP project of a global pharmaceutical company in India. In line with the existing research, we found three kinds of frames—paradoxical, business case, and business—held differently across organizational levels and over time. We also found that the shift in frames of both project and organizational leaders was mediated by the decision-making horizon. The initial divergence across organizational levels, seen in paradoxical and business frames, was mediated by long-term decision-making horizon. However, there was an eventual convergence toward business frames associated with the shift from long- to shorter-term decision-making horizons and one that led to the project’s closure. We contribute by proposing a dynamic model of cognitive frames in sustainability, where the research has either alluded to top-down or bottom-up understanding.

Suggested Citation

  • Garima Sharma & Anand Kumar Jaiswal, 2018. "Unsustainability of Sustainability: Cognitive Frames and Tensions in Bottom of the Pyramid Projects," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 148(2), pages 291-307, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:148:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1007_s10551-017-3584-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-017-3584-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10551-017-3584-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-017-3584-5?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Natalie Slawinski & Pratima Bansal, 2015. "Short on Time: Intertemporal Tensions in Business Sustainability," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 531-549, April.
    2. Wanda J. Orlikowski & JoAnne Yates, 2002. "It's About Time: Temporal Structuring in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(6), pages 684-700, December.
    3. Tobias Hahn & Jonatan Pinkse & Lutz Preuss & Frank Figge, 2015. "Tensions in Corporate Sustainability: Towards an Integrative Framework," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 127(2), pages 297-316, March.
    4. Miron-Spektor, Ella & Gino, Francesca & Argote, Linda, 2011. "Paradoxical frames and creative sparks: Enhancing individual creativity through conflict and integration," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 116(2), pages 229-240.
    5. Marcie J. Tyre & Wanda J. Orlikowski, 1994. "Windows of Opportunity: Temporal Patterns of Technological Adaptation in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 98-118, February.
    6. Minna Halme & Sara Lindeman & Paula Linna, 2012. "Innovation for Inclusive Business: Intrapreneurial Bricolage in Multinational Corporations," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(4), pages 743-784, June.
    7. Sarah Kaplan, 2008. "Framing Contests: Strategy Making Under Uncertainty," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(5), pages 729-752, October.
    8. Anand Kumar Jaiswal, 2008. "The Fortune at the Bottom or the Middle of the Pyramid?," Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, MIT Press, vol. 3(1), pages 85-100, January.
    9. Nancy Staudenmayer & Marcie Tyre & Leslie Perlow, 2002. "Time to Change: Temporal Shifts as Enablers of Organizational Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(5), pages 583-597, October.
    10. Rüdiger Hahn, 2009. "The Ethical Rational of Business for the Poor – Integrating the Concepts Bottom of the Pyramid, Sustainable Development, and Corporate Citizenship," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 84(3), pages 313-324, February.
    11. Sarah Kaplan & Wanda J. Orlikowski, 2013. "Temporal Work in Strategy Making," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 965-995, August.
    12. Paul Tracey & Nelson Phillips & Owen Jarvis, 2011. "Bridging Institutional Entrepreneurship and the Creation of New Organizational Forms: A Multilevel Model," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 60-80, February.
    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. Joya A. Kemper & C. Michael Hall & Paul W. Ballantine, 2019. "Marketing and Sustainability: Business as Usual or Changing Worldviews?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-17, February.
    2. Belinda Wade & Andrew Griffiths, 2022. "Exploring the Cognitive Foundations of Managerial (Climate) Change Decisions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 15-40, November.
    3. Tulin Dzhengiz, 2018. "The Relationship of Organisational Value Frames with the Configuration of Alliance Portfolios: Cases from Electricity Utilities in Great Britain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-29, November.
    4. 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.
    5. Rahul Nilakantan & Deepak Iyengar & Samar K. Datta & Shashank Rao, 2021. "On Ethical Violations in Microfinance Backed Small Businesses: Family and Household Welfare," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 172(4), pages 785-802, September.
    6. Khaksar, Seyed Mohammad Sadegh & Shahmehr, Fatemeh S. & Miah, Shah & Daim, Tugrul & Ozdemir, Dilek, 2024. "Privacy concerns versus personalisation benefits in social robot acceptance by employees: A paradox theory — Contingency perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    7. Campbell, Norah & Mialon, Melissa & Reilly, Kathryn & Browne, Sarah & Finucane, Francis M., 2020. "How are frames generated? Insights from the industry lobby against the sugar tax in Ireland," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 264(C).
    8. Julia Benkert, 2021. "Reframing Business Sustainability Decision-Making with Value-Focussed Thinking," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 174(2), pages 441-456, November.
    9. Yoojung Ahn, 2022. "A Socio-cognitive Model of Sustainability Performance: Linking CEO Career Experience, Social Ties, and Attention Breadth," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 175(2), pages 303-321, January.
    10. George Ferns & Kenneth Amaeshi & Aliette Lambert, 2019. "Drilling their Own Graves: How the European Oil and Gas Supermajors Avoid Sustainability Tensions Through Mythmaking," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 158(1), pages 201-231, August.
    11. Carolin Brix‐asala & Stefan Seuring & Philipp C Sauer & Axel Zehendner & Lara Schilling, 2021. "Resolving the base of the pyramid inclusion paradox through supplier development," Post-Print hal-03891218, HAL.
    12. Danilo Boffa & Antonio Prencipe & Armando Papa & Christian Corsi & Mario Sorrentino, 2023. "Boosting circular economy via the b-corporation roads. The effect of the entrepreneurial culture and exogenous factors on sustainability performance," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 523-561, June.
    13. Mortimer, Genevieve & Tura, Nina & Mortimer, Bruce & Busch, Timo, 2019. "Positioning sustainability to deal with complex systemsː From sustainability identity to sustainability outlook," WiSo-HH Working Paper Series 49, University of Hamburg, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences, WISO Research Laboratory.
    14. Jay Joseph & Helen Borland & Marc Orlitzky & Adam Lindgreen, 2020. "Seeing Versus Doing: How Businesses Manage Tensions in Pursuit of Sustainability," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 164(2), pages 349-370, June.
    15. Sitong (Michelle) Chen & Gabriel Eweje, 2022. "Managing tensions in sustainable development in Chinese and New Zealand business partnerships: Integrative approaches," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(5), pages 2568-2587, July.
    16. Gerard Farias & Christine Farias & Isabella Krysa & Joel Harmon, 2020. "Sustainability Mindsets for Strategic Management: Lifting the Yoke of the Neo-Classical Economic Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-14, August.
    17. Carolin Brix‐Asala & Stefan Seuring & Philipp C. Sauer & Axel Zehendner & Lara Schilling, 2021. "Resolving the base of the pyramid inclusion paradox through supplier development," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(7), pages 3208-3227, November.
    18. Maria Jose Murcia & Pilar Acosta, 2023. "Accounting for Plural Cognitive Framings of Growth and Sustainability: Rethinking Management Education in Latin America," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 185(2), pages 299-313, June.
    19. Enrico Fontana & Hyemi Shin & Chikako Oka & Jos Gamble, 2022. "Tensions in the strategic integration of corporate sustainability through global standards: Evidence from Japan and South Korea," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 875-891, March.

    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. Tobias Hahn & Frank Figge & Jonatan Pinkse & Lutz Preuss, 2018. "A Paradox Perspective on Corporate Sustainability: Descriptive, Instrumental, and Normative Aspects," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 148(2), pages 235-248, March.
    2. Zhang, Yan & Han, Yu-Lan, 2019. "Paradoxical leader behavior in long-term corporate development: Antecedents and consequences," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 42-54.
    3. Sirén, Charlotta & Parida, Vinit & Frishammar, Johan & Wincent, Joakim, 2020. "Time and time-based organizing of innovation: Influence of temporality on entrepreneurial firms’ performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 23-32.
    4. Addisu A. Lashitew & Lydia Bals & Rob Tulder, 2020. "Inclusive Business at the Base of the Pyramid: The Role of Embeddedness for Enabling Social Innovations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 162(2), pages 421-448, March.
    5. Päivi Karhu & Paavo Ritala, 2020. "The multiple faces of tension: dualities in decision-making," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 485-518, June.
    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. Michael Lounsbury & Christine M. Beckman, 2015. "Celebrating Organization Theory," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(2), pages 288-308, March.
    8. Angelika Zimmermann & Nora Albers & Jasper O. Kenter, 2022. "Deliberating Our Frames: How Members of Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives Use Shared Frames to Tackle Within-Frame Conflicts Over Sustainability Issues," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 178(3), pages 757-782, July.
    9. Pii‐Tuulia Nikula, 2022. "Beyond compliance – Voluntary climate mitigation by New Zealand firms," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(5), pages 1456-1464, September.
    10. Paula Jarzabkowski & Sarah Kaplan, 2015. "Strategy tools-in-use: A framework for understanding “technologies of rationality” in practice," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(4), pages 537-558, April.
    11. Kadia Georges Aka & François Labelle, 2021. "The Collaborative Process of Sustainable Innovations under the Lens of Actor–Network Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-32, September.
    12. Kummitha, Rama Krishna Reddy, 2020. "Why distance matters: The relatedness between technology development and its appropriation in smart cities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    13. Donal Crilly, 2017. "Time and Space in Strategy Discourse: Implications for Intertemporal Choice," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(12), pages 2370-2389, December.
    14. Elisa Alt & Justin B. Craig, 2016. "Selling Issues with Solutions: Igniting Social Intrapreneurship in for-Profit Organizations," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(5), pages 794-820, July.
    15. Yoojung Ahn, 2022. "A Socio-cognitive Model of Sustainability Performance: Linking CEO Career Experience, Social Ties, and Attention Breadth," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 175(2), pages 303-321, January.
    16. Siebelink, Remco & Hofman, Erwin & Halman, Johannes I.M. & Nee, Ingo, 2021. "Roadmapping: (Missed) opportunities to overcome strategic challenges," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 501-512.
    17. Hao Liang & Christopher Marquis & Luc Renneboog & Sunny Li Sun, 2018. "Future-Time Framing: The Effect of Language on Corporate Future Orientation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1093-1111, December.
    18. Sini Laari & Tomi Solakivi & Anu Bask & Juuso Töyli & Lauri Ojala, 2021. "Unravelling Mickey Mouse: The Effect of Supply Chain Position and Organisational Slack on the Uneven Balance of Sustainability Dimensions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-16, December.
    19. Shardul Sharad Phadnis & Inga‐Lena Darkow, 2021. "Scenario planning as a strategy process to foster supply chain adaptability: theoretical framework and longitudinal case," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(2), June.
    20. David V. Boivin & Olivier Boiral, 2022. "So Close, Yet So Far Away: Exploring the Role of Psychological Distance from Climate Change on Corporate Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-19, 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:kap:jbuset:v:148:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1007_s10551-017-3584-5. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.