IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/tuhtim/95.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Standard implementation trajectories for sustainable product design: A configurational approach

Author

Listed:
  • Smits, Armand
  • Drabe, Viktoria
  • Herstatt, Cornelius

Abstract

While sustainability issues increasingly gain importance for new product design, they also further complicate the NPD process. In many cases it is hard to exactly measure the socio-environmental impact of new products, and sustainability targets may conflict with other ones. Innovators can aim to manage these challenges by turning to voluntary sustainability standards (VSS), like the practices and certificates that come with the EU Ecolabel, Greenguard or Cradle to Cradle standards. VSS are predefined rules, procedures, and methods for common and voluntary use and focus on social and environmental performance. It is proposed that the local implementation of these general standards from outside the organization will likely lead to a variety of firm-specific implementation trajectories, ultimately leading to different levels of VSS implementation extensiveness across firms. This variety that is not sufficiently addressed in extant research, is researched in the current study. Using organizational learning as theoretical lens this study investigates configuration(s) of factors, including the embeddedness of the relationship between the focal firm and standard specific organizations that drive VSS implementation extensiveness. In doing so, it uses the configurational research approach fuzzy set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA). Empirically the study draws on qualitative and quantitative data from an international collection of firms that implemented the Cradle to Cradle standard. The study shows that VSS are multifaceted and that configurations that consistently drive VSS certification extensiveness differ from the ones that drive VSS practice implementation extensiveness. Additionally, it is found that configurations that consistently lead to the absence of high implementation extensiveness do not simply mirror the ones for high implementation extensiveness but have unique properties. Finally the study illustrates that similar levels of implementation extensiveness can result from multiple distinct configurations. The study mainly contributes to extant research on sustainable product design and how to integrate general principles of sustainable design into the NPD process.

Suggested Citation

  • Smits, Armand & Drabe, Viktoria & Herstatt, Cornelius, 2016. "Standard implementation trajectories for sustainable product design: A configurational approach," Working Papers 95, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:tuhtim:95
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/149394/1/875987265.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Blind, Knut & Mangelsdorf, Axel, 2016. "Motives to standardize: Empirical evidence from Germany," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 48, pages 13-24.
    2. Adobor, Henry, 2006. "The role of personal relationships in inter-firm alliances: Benefits, dysfunctions, and some suggestions," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 473-486.
    3. Thomas Greckhamer, 2016. "CEO compensation in relation to worker compensation across countries: The configurational impact of country-level institutions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 793-815, April.
    4. Chialin Chen, 2001. "Design for the Environment: A Quality-Based Model for Green Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(2), pages 250-263, February.
    5. Wagner, Marcus, 2008. "Empirical influence of environmental management on innovation: Evidence from Europe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 392-402, June.
    6. Andreas Rasche & Frank Bakker & Jeremy Moon, 2013. "Complete and Partial Organizing for Corporate Social Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 115(4), pages 651-663, July.
    7. Kolk, Ans, 2005. "Corporate Social Responsibility in the Coffee Sector:: The Dynamics of MNC Responses and Code Development," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 228-236, April.
    8. Guoyou Qi & Saixing Zeng & Xiaodong Li & Chiming Tam, 2012. "Role of Internalization Process in Defining the Relationship between ISO 14001 Certification and Corporate Environmental Performance," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(3), pages 129-140, May.
    9. Helms, Wesley & Webb, Kernaghan, 2014. "Perceived voluntary code legitimacy: Towards a theoretical framework and research agenda," Journal of Management & Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(3), pages 287-312, May.
    10. Teisl, Mario F. & Roe, Brian & Hicks, Robert L., 2002. "Can Eco-Labels Tune a Market? Evidence from Dolphin-Safe Labeling," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 339-359, May.
    11. Dayna Simpson & Damien Power & Robert Klassen, 2012. "When One Size Does Not Fit All: A Problem of Fit Rather than Failure for Voluntary Management Standards," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 110(1), pages 85-95, September.
    12. Ragin, Charles C., 2000. "Fuzzy-Set Social Science," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226702773, January.
    13. Luca Berchicci & Wynand Bodewes, 2005. "Bridging environmental issues with new product development," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(5), pages 272-285, September.
    14. Haitao Yin & Peter J. Schmeidler, 2009. "Why do standardized ISO 14001 environmental management systems lead to heterogeneous environmental outcomes?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(7), pages 469-486, November.
    15. Bruner, Robert & Spekman, Robert, 1998. "The dark side of alliances:: Lessons from Volvo-Renault," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 136-150, April.
    16. Ragin, Charles C., 2006. "Set Relations in Social Research: Evaluating Their Consistency and Coverage," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(3), pages 291-310, July.
    17. 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.
    18. repec:ucp:bkecon:9780226702766 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Totti Könnölä & Gregory C. Unruh, 2007. "Really changing the course: the limitations of environmental management systems for innovation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(8), pages 525-537, 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. Lawton, Thomas C. & De Villa, Maria Andrea & Santamaria-Alvarez, Sandra Milena, 2024. "Making Sense of Socio-Political Risks in International Business: A Configurational Approach to Embracing Complexity," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(2).
    2. Wei Deng & Qiaozhuan Liang & Peihua Fan & Lin Cui, 2020. "Social entrepreneurship and well-being: The configurational impact of institutions and social capital," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 37(4), pages 1013-1037, December.
    3. Bencsik, Barbara & Palmié, Maximilian & Parida, Vinit & Wincent, Joakim & Gassmann, Oliver, 2023. "Business models for digital sustainability: Framework, microfoundations of value capture, and empirical evidence from 130 smart city services," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    4. Muñoz, Pablo & Kibler, Ewald & Mandakovic, Vesna & Amorós, José Ernesto, 2022. "Local entrepreneurial ecosystems as configural narratives: A new way of seeing and evaluating antecedents and outcomes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(9).
    5. Cervelló-Royo, R. & Moya-Clemente, I. & Perelló-Marín, M.R. & Ribes-Giner, G., 2020. "Sustainable development, economic and financial factors, that influence the opportunity-driven entrepreneurship. An fsQCA approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 393-402.
    6. Kier, Alexander S. & McMullen, Jeffery S., 2020. "Entrepreneurial imaginativeness and new venture ideation in newly forming teams," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 35(6).
    7. Douglas, Evan J. & Shepherd, Dean A. & Prentice, Catherine, 2020. "Using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis for a finer-grained understanding of entrepreneurship," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 35(1).
    8. Christian Linder & Christian Lechner & Frank Pelzel, 2020. "Many Roads Lead to Rome: How Human, Social, and Financial Capital Are Related to New Venture Survival," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 44(5), pages 909-932, September.
    9. Ozusaglam, Serdal & Kesidou, Effie & Wong, Chee Yew, 2018. "Performance effects of complementarity between environmental management systems and environmental technologies," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 197(C), pages 112-122.
    10. Kimmitt, Jonathan & Muñoz, Pablo & Newbery, Robert, 2020. "Poverty and the varieties of entrepreneurship in the pursuit of prosperity," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 35(4).
    11. Elisabeth S.C. Berger & Andreas Köhn, 2020. "Exploring the differences in early-stage start-up valuation across countries: an institutional perspective," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 327-344, March.
    12. Muñoz, Pablo & Cohen, Boyd, 2017. "Mapping out the sharing economy: A configurational approach to sharing business modeling," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 21-37.
    13. Douglas, Evan & Prentice, Catherine, 2019. "Innovation and profit motivations for social entrepreneurship: A fuzzy-set analysis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 69-79.
    14. Kamini Gupta & Donal Crilly & Thomas Greckhamer, 2020. "Stakeholder engagement strategies, national institutions, and firm performance: A configurational perspective," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(10), pages 1869-1900, October.
    15. Markus Mayer & Markus Voeth, 2022. "Improving negotiation success in B2B sales organizations: is structured negotiation management a success factor?," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 92(2), pages 163-196, February.
    16. Grohs, Reinhard & Raies, Karine & Koll, Oliver & Mühlbacher, Hans, 2016. "One pie, many recipes: Alternative paths to high brand strength," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 2244-2251.
    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. Barry Cooper & Judith Glaesser, 2016. "Analysing necessity and sufficiency with Qualitative Comparative Analysis: how do results vary as case weights change?," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 327-346, January.
    19. Wang, Huanming & Ran, Bing, 2022. "How business-related governance strategies impact paths towards the formation of global cities? An institutional embeddedness perspective," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    20. Katarzyna Boratynska, 2021. "Determinants of Economic Fragility in Central and Eastern European Countries FsQCA Approach," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(3B), pages 827-837.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    sustainable product design; voluntary sustainability standards; fsQCA; implementation; Cradle to Cradle;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:zbw:tuhtim:95. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ittuhde.html .

    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.