IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/bstrat/v33y2024i3p2367-2383.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How do stakeholder groups make sense of sustainability: Analysing differences in the complexity of their cognitive frames

Author

Listed:
  • Lutz Preuss
  • Isabel Fischer
  • Bimal Arora

Abstract

Characterizing major sustainability issues as ‘grand challenges’ has led to a call for collaboration among heterogeneous stakeholder groups, not least in multi‐stakeholder initiatives (MSIs). Research into MSIs has made substantial progress in understanding their workings; yet, it is still criticized for remaining undertheorized, echoing a criticism of management studies generally as paying insufficient attention to the micro–macro divide. Hence, we examined differences between stakeholder groups in the complexity of their cognitive frames on the topic of sustainability. We analysed 265 cognitive frames across four stakeholder groups (business, government, NGO, education). Analysing these frames in terms of the two dimensions of cognitive complexity—differentiation and integration—we found statistically significant differences in frame complexity between stakeholder groups. These micro‐level cognitive differences can explain macro‐level problems in stakeholder engagement and communication. Hence, we conclude by discussing the implications of our findings for the enhancement of the effectiveness of MSIs.

Suggested Citation

  • Lutz Preuss & Isabel Fischer & Bimal Arora, 2024. "How do stakeholder groups make sense of sustainability: Analysing differences in the complexity of their cognitive frames," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(3), pages 2367-2383, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:bstrat:v:33:y:2024:i:3:p:2367-2383
    DOI: 10.1002/bse.3611
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3611
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/bse.3611?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Jane E. Dutton & Susan J. Ashford & Regina M. O’ Neill & Erika Hayes & Elizabeth E. Wierba, 1997. "Reading the wind: how middle managers assess the context for selling issues to top managers," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(5), pages 407-423, May.
    3. Friederike Schultz & Itziar Castelló & Mette Morsing, 2013. "The Construction of Corporate Social Responsibility in Network Societies: A Communication View," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 115(4), pages 681-692, July.
    4. Margaret Brunton & Gabriel Eweje & Nazim Taskin, 2017. "Communicating Corporate Social Responsibility to Internal Stakeholders: Walking the Walk or Just Talking the Talk?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(1), pages 31-48, January.
    5. Wendy K. Smith & Michael L. Tushman, 2005. "Managing Strategic Contradictions: A Top Management Model for Managing Innovation Streams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(5), pages 522-536, October.
    6. Tobias Hahn & Noël Albert, 2017. "Strong Reciprocity in Consumer Boycotts," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 145(3), pages 509-524, October.
    7. Gerard P. Hodgkinson & Barbara Burkhard & Nicolai J. Foss & Dietmar Grichnik & Riikka M. Sarala & Yi Tang & Marc Van Essen, 2023. "The Heuristics and Biases of Top Managers: Past, Present, and Future," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(5), pages 1033-1063, July.
    8. Gail Whiteman & Brian Walker & Paolo Perego, 2013. "Planetary Boundaries: Ecological Foundations for Corporate Sustainability," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(2), pages 307-336, March.
    9. Stephen P. Osborne, 2018. "From public service-dominant logic to public service logic: are public service organizations capable of co-production and value co-creation?," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(2), pages 225-231, February.
    10. 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.
    11. Lorenz Graf-Vlachy & Jonathan Bundy & Donald C. Hambrick, 2020. "Effects of an Advancing Tenure on CEO Cognitive Complexity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 936-959, July.
    12. Brand, Teunis & Blok, Vincent & Verweij, Marcel, 2020. "Stakeholder Dialogue as Agonistic Deliberation: Exploring the Role of Conflict and Self-Interest in Business-NGO Interaction," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(1), pages 3-30, January.
    13. Paul McDonald, 2018. "Sustainability management: research insights from social cognitive neuroscience," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(8), pages 1355-1367, December.
    14. Dennis A. Gioia & Kumar Chittipeddi, 1991. "Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(6), pages 433-448, September.
    15. Tim Loughran & Bill McDonald & James R. Otteson, 2023. "How Have Corporate Codes of Ethics Responded to an Era of Increased Scrutiny?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(4), pages 1029-1044, April.
    16. Kai Hockerts, 2015. "A Cognitive Perspective on the Business Case for Corporate Sustainability," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(2), pages 102-122, February.
    17. Gianluca Elia & Alessandro Margherita & Claudio Petti, 2020. "Building responses to sustainable development challenges: A multistakeholder collaboration framework and application to climate change," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 2465-2478, September.
    18. Julia Prömpeler & Dennis B. Veltrop & Janka I. Stoker & Floor A. Rink, 2023. "Striving for sustainable development at the top: Exploring the interplay of director and CEO values on environmental sustainability focus," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(7), pages 5068-5082, November.
    19. Sarah Kaplan, 2008. "Framing Contests: Strategy Making Under Uncertainty," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(5), pages 729-752, October.
    20. John S. Dryzek & Simon Niemeyer, 2006. "Reconciling Pluralism and Consensus as Political Ideals," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(3), pages 634-649, July.
    21. Juliane Reinecke & Shaz Ansari, 2016. "Taming Wicked Problems: The Role of Framing in the Construction of Corporate Social Responsibility," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 299-329, May.
    22. Yves Fassin, 2009. "Inconsistencies in Activists’ Behaviours and the Ethics of NGOs," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 90(4), pages 503-521, December.
    23. Elizabeth J. Klitsie & Shahzad Ansari & Henk W. Volberda, 2018. "Maintenance of Cross-Sector Partnerships: The Role of Frames in Sustained Collaboration," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(2), pages 401-423, June.
    24. James P. Walsh, 1995. "Managerial and Organizational Cognition: Notes from a Trip Down Memory Lane," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(3), pages 280-321, June.
    25. Manon Eikelenboom & Thomas B. Long, 2023. "Breaking the Cycle of Marginalization: How to Involve Local Communities in Multi-stakeholder Initiatives?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 186(1), pages 31-62, August.
    26. Martin Fougère & Nikodemus Solitander, 2020. "Dissent in Consensusland: An Agonistic Problematization of Multi-stakeholder Governance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 164(4), pages 683-699, July.
    27. Daniel Arenas & Josep Lozano & Laura Albareda, 2009. "The Role of NGOs in CSR: Mutual Perceptions Among Stakeholders," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 88(1), pages 175-197, August.
    28. Shavin Malhotra & Joseph S. Harrison, 2022. "A blessing and a curse: How chief executive officer cognitive complexity influences firm performance under varying industry conditions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(13), pages 2809-2828, December.
    29. 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.
    30. Frank G.A. de Bakker & Frank den Hond & Judy N. Muthuri & Glen Whelan, 2019. "Talking the walk: The deflation response to legitimacy challenges," Post-Print hal-02508975, HAL.
    31. Samuel Petros Sebhatu & Bo Enquist, 2022. "Values and Multi-stakeholder Dialog for Business Transformation in Light of the UN Sustainable Development Goals," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 180(4), pages 1059-1074, November.
    32. Jean-Pascal Gond & Assâad El Akremi & Valérie Swaen & Nishat Babu, 2017. "The psychological microfoundations of corporate social responsibility: A person-centric systematic review," Post-Print halshs-01698534, HAL.
    33. Lester M. Salamon, 2010. "Putting The Civil Society Sector On The Economic Map Of The World," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 81(2), pages 167-210, June.
    34. Itziar Castelló & Mette Morsing & Friederike Schultz, 2013. "Communicative Dynamics and the Polyphony of Corporate Social Responsibility in the Network Society," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 118(4), pages 683-694, December.
    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Tobias Hahn & Garima Sharma & Ante Glavas, 2024. "Employee‐CSR Tensions: Drivers of Employee (Dis)Engagement with Contested CSR Initiatives," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(4), pages 1364-1392, June.
    4. 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.
    5. Julia Benkert, 2021. "Reframing Business Sustainability Decision-Making with Value-Focussed Thinking," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 174(2), pages 441-456, November.
    6. Lutz Preuss & Ralf Barkemeyer & Bimal Arora & Shilpi Banerjee, 2024. "Sensemaking along global supply chains: implications for the ability of the MNE to manage sustainability challenges," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 55(4), pages 492-514, June.
    7. 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.
    8. Stefan Gröschl & Patricia Gabaldón & Tobias Hahn, 2019. "The Co-evolution of Leaders’ Cognitive Complexity and Corporate Sustainability: The Case of the CEO of Puma," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 155(3), pages 741-762, March.
    9. Gavin M Schwarz & Karin Sanders & Dave Bouckenooghe, 2020. "In the driving seat: Executive’s perceived control over environment," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 45(2), pages 317-342, May.
    10. Suzana Matoh & Sally V. Russell & Katy Roelich & Sally Randles, 2024. "Circular business model innovation and cognitive framing: Addressing the “missing micro”," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(8), pages 8656-8667, December.
    11. Xue, Jinjie & Liu, Junqi & Geng, Zizhen & Yuan, Hongping & Chao, Lei, 2023. "Why and when do paradoxical management capabilities matter to paradoxical pressure? An empirical investigation of the role of coopetition," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    12. Joern Hoppmann & Alice Sakhel & Marcel Richert, 2018. "With a little help from a stranger: The impact of external change agents on corporate sustainability investments," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(7), pages 1052-1066, November.
    13. Gabriela Gutierrez-Huerter O & Stefan Gold & Alexander Trautrims, 2023. "Change in Rhetoric but not in Action? Framing of the Ethical Issue of Modern Slavery in a UK Sector at High Risk of Labor Exploitation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 182(1), pages 35-58, January.
    14. Eric Guthey & Mette Morsing, 2014. "CSR and the Mediated Emergence of Strategic Ambiguity," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 120(4), pages 555-569, April.
    15. 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.
    16. Daniella Laureiro-Martínez & Stefano Brusoni & Nicola Canessa & Maurizio Zollo, 2015. "Understanding the exploration–exploitation dilemma: An fMRI study of attention control and decision-making performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3), pages 319-338, March.
    17. 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).
    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. Natalie Slawinski & Pratima Bansal, 2015. "Short on Time: Intertemporal Tensions in Business Sustainability," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 531-549, April.
    20. Donal Crilly & Pamela Sloan, 2014. "Autonomy or Control? Organizational Architecture and Corporate Attention to Stakeholders," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(2), pages 339-355, April.

    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:33:y:2024:i:3:p:2367-2383. 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: 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.