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
    ---><---

    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.

    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.