My aim in this article is twofold. First, I will illuminate the triangular conceptual connections between responsibility, authority, and power as they are exposed in the organizational realm; second, I will show how the three concepts are distinct. Relying on the work of Peter Strawson and his followers on responsibility for my point of departure, I will show that the connection between the inner corporational authority and its inner matching responsibility is different from the connection between the outer corporational forces (...) and influences and the CSR that they develop in reaction to these. This will expose another important distinction between two kinds of responsibility: the organizational kind, as instantiated in organizations, and the social kind, which constitutes the outer aspect of the CSR. Though many thinkers address different kinds of responsibility, a comparative perspective of these different concepts is missing. I attempt to bring three of these separate discourses together to examine them alongside one another, evaluating them in the light of their differences and similarities. This will expose a new typology of ‘responsibility’ that penetrates and illuminates the relations between corporations and society and as such enhance our understanding of organizational responsibility. (shrink)

This paper provides an exploratory comparative assessment of the institutional pressures influencing corporate social responsibility in a developed country, UK, vs. a developing country, Brazil, based on a survey of different actors. Information on sustainability concerns, organizational strategies and mechanisms of pressure was collected through interviews with environmental regulatory agencies, financial institutions, media and non-governmental organizations. Our results confirm that the more advanced awareness and CSR responsiveness in the UK is a consequence of a predominance of coercive and normative forces (...) on the organizational field. The institutional forces tend to build a Brazilian organizational field that is relational based and risk intensive. The findings lend support to the view that CSR responses are unlikely to be easily transformed into uniform standardized practices across the globe. This paper contributes to a collective understanding of the organizational field and a common template for CSR in the context of developed and developing countries. (shrink)

The study contributes to building an understanding of the impact of political forces on the information environment of listed firms in a developing economy. Specifically, it investigates the tensions between politico-institutional factors and accounting regulation on the prolonged and incomplete implementation of the International Financial Reporting Standards in Bangladesh from 1998 to 2010. Two phases of interviews were conducted in 2010–2011 and IFRS-related enforcement documents from 1998 to 2010 were evaluated. The study contributes that IFRSs are being diffused to developing (...) countries like Bangladesh, but they invariably interact with local institutions, with variable outcomes. Coercive, normative and mimetic isomorphisms are low in Bangladesh. Notably, political forces have been undermining mimetic isomorphism because of the high level of government intervention and the high level of political lobbying. Political institutional pressures stand in the way of mimetic isomorphism and constitute negative forces that add further tension to accounting regulation in Bangladesh. Regarding the low level of normative isomorphism, there is evidence of a ‘blame culture’, with state institutions and professional accountancy institutions in the country blaming each other for the poor progress in IFRS implementation. Although the study focuses on Bangladesh, its results have implications for international policy makers, as well as the governments and regulators of other developing economies facing similar challenges in implementing IFRS. (shrink)

My aim in this article is twofold. First, I will illuminate the triangular conceptual connections between responsibility, authority, and power as they are exposed in the organizational realm; second, I will show how the three concepts are distinct. Relying on the work of Peter Strawson and his followers on responsibility for my point of departure, I will show that the connection between the inner corporational authority and its inner matching responsibility is different from the connection between the outer corporational forces (...) and influences and the CSR that they develop in reaction to these. This will expose another important distinction between two kinds of responsibility: the organizational kind, as instantiated in organizations, and the social kind, which constitutes the outer aspect of the CSR. Though many thinkers address different kinds of responsibility, a comparative perspective of these different concepts is missing. I attempt to bring three of these separate discourses together to examine them alongside one another, evaluating them in the light of their differences and similarities. This will expose a new typology of ‘responsibility’ that penetrates and illuminates the relations between corporations and society and as such enhance our understanding of organizational responsibility. (shrink)

There is a growing interest in how the notion of corporate social responsibility as shared value creation is translated in Scandinavia. However, current research seems to disregard that the specific institutional context is ambiguous, enabling the organization, and its internal stakeholders to translate the institutional logics into contradictory meanings of CSR as shared value creation. Building on the institutional logics perspective and the metaphor of translation, and framed within a case study of a Danish CSR frontrunner, this paper explores how (...) the notion of CSR as shared value creation is translated at both the organizational and individual level through discourse. The study shows that the organization and its internal stakeholders employ different strategies to reconcile the institutional logics of ethics and economy, suggesting that the translation processes are a complex communicative matter of continuously balancing the contradictory institutional logics to maintain legitimacy in the eyes of external stakeholders. (shrink)