Order:
Disambiguations
R. Wesselink [5]Renate Wesselink [4]
  1. Individual Competencies for Corporate Social Responsibility: A Literature and Practice Perspective.E. R. Osagie, R. Wesselink, V. Blok, T. Lans & M. Mulder - 2016 - Journal of Business Ethics 135 (2):233-252.
    Because corporate social responsibility can be beneficial to both companies and its stakeholders, interest in factors that support CSR performance has grown in recent years. A thorough integration of CSR in core business processes is particularly important for achieving effective long-term CSR practices. Here, we explored the individual CSR-related competencies that support CSR implementation in a corporate context. First, a systematic literature review was performed in which relevant scientific articles were identified and analyzed. Next, 28 CSR directors and managers were (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  2. Dealing with the Wicked Problem of Sustainability: The Role of Individual Virtuous Competence.Vincent Blok, Bart Gremmen & Renate Wesselink - 2015 - Business and Professional Ethics Journal 34 (3):297-327.
    Over the past few years, individual competencies for sustainability have received a lot of attention in the educational, sustainability and business administration literature. In this article, we explore the meaning of two rather new and unfamiliar moral competencies in the field of corporate sustainability: normative competence and action competence. Because sustainability can be seen as a highly complex or ‘wicked’ problem, it is unclear what ‘normativity’ in the normative competence and ‘responsible action’ in the action competence actually mean. In this (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  3. (1 other version)Contextualizing Individual Competencies for Managing the Corporate Social Responsibility Adaptation Process: The Apparent Influence of the Business Case Logic.Martin Mulder, Vincent Blok, Renate Wesselink & Eghe R. Osagie - 2019 - Business and Society 58 (2):369-403.
    Companies committed to corporate social responsibility should ensure that their managers possess the appropriate competencies to effectively manage the CSR adaptation process. The literature provides insights into the individual competencies these managers need but fails to prioritize them and adequately contextualize them in a manner that makes them meaningful in practice. In this study, we contextualized the competencies within the different job roles CSR managers have in the CSR adaptation process. We interviewed 28 CSR managers, followed by a survey to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  4. An Agonistic Approach to Technological Conflict.Eugen Octav Popa, Vincent Blok & Renate Wesselink - 2020 - Philosophy and Technology 34 (4):717-737.
    Traditional approaches to conflict are oriented towards establishing consensus, either in the form of a resolution of the conflict or in the form of an ‘agree-to-disagree’ standstill between the stakeholders. In this paper, we criticize these traditional approaches, each for specific reasons, and we propose and develop the agonistic approach to conflict. Based on Chantal Mouffe’s agonistic democratic theory, the agonistic approach to conflict is more welcoming of dissensus, replacing discussion stoppers with discussion starters and replacing standstills with contestation. We (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  5. Social labs as an inclusive methodology to implement and study social change: the case of responsible research and innovation.Jos Timmermans, V. Blok, Robert Braun, R. Wesselink & Rasmus Øjvind Nielsen - forthcoming - Journal of Responsible Innovation.
    The embedding and promotion of social change is faced with aparadoxical challenge. In order to mainstream an approach to socialchange such as responsible research and innovation and makeit into a practical reality rather than an abstract ideal, we need tohave conceptual clarity and empirical evidence. But, in order to beable to gather empirical evidence, we have to presuppose that theapproach already exists in practice. This paper proposes a social labmethodology that is suited to deal with this circularity. Themethodology combines the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  6. A Processual Approach To Friction in Quadruple Helix Collaborations.O. E. Popa, V. Blok & R. Wesselink - 2021 - Science and Public Policy 47 (6):876-889.
    R&D collaborations between industry, government, civil society, and research ) have recently gained attention from R&D theorists and practitioners. In aiming to come to grips with their complexity, past models have generally taken a stakeholder-analytical approach based on stakeholder types. Yet stakeholder types are difficult to operationalise. We therefore argue that a processual model is more suited for studying the interaction in QHCs because it eschews matters of titles and identities. We develop such a model in which the QHC is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  7. Discussion structures as tools for public deliberation.E. Popa, Vincent Blok & R. Wesselink - 2020 - Public Understanding of Science 1 (29):76-93.
    We propose the use of discussion structures as tools for analyzing policy debates in a way that enables the increased participation of lay stakeholders. Discussion structures are argumentation-theoretical tools that can be employed to tackle three barriers that separate lay stakeholders from policy debates: difficulty, magnitude, and complexity. We exemplify the use of these tools on a debate in research policy on the question of responsibility. By making use of discussion structures, we focus on the argumentative moves performed by the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8. A Processual Approach to friction in Quadruple Helix Collaborations.E. Popa, Vincent Blok & R. Wesselink - 2020 - Science and Public Policy 6 (47):876-889.
    R&D collaborations between industry, government, civil society, and research (also known as ‘quadruple helix collaborations’ (QHCs)) have recently gained attention from R&D theorists and practitioners. In aiming to come to grips with their complexity, past models have generally taken a stakeholder-analytical approach based on stakeholder types. Yet stakeholder types are difficult to operationalise. We therefore argue that a processual model is more suited for studying the interaction in QHCs because it eschews matters of titles and identities. We develop such a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark