David Risi

Business and society (B&S) scholarship that uses the theoretical perspective of institutionalism combines different research approaches to values. Within the B&S literature drawing on institutionalism, we identified and categorized the research on values according to a spectrum of normative and/or descriptive approaches (including both and neither approaches). Primarily, we focused on how the normative and descriptive approaches interrelate and integrate. We argue that drawing on John Dewey’s pragmatism and Philip Selznick’s institutionalism can help further an integrative approach, which holds great potential for advancing theorization in the B&S field while increasing its practical relevance.

As climate change, social inequities, and other critical issues grow ever more urgent, many companies have built dedicated departments focused on corporate social responsibility (CSR). But while this is an important first step, the authors’ new research suggests that organizations with the most mature CSR programs are often actually those with the smallest CSR departments. Based on an in-depth analysis of several Swiss firms as well as a review of prior research on CSR implementation, they identify a three-phase process through which many companies progress as their CSR operations advance from high-level vision to on-the-ground impact: A nascent stage in which the CSR department centralizes and coalesces, an intermediate stage in which it decentralizes and orchestrates, and a final stage in which it retreats and consults. Through this process, resources shift from the central CSR team out into functional units, meaning that the size and budget of the CSR department is often a poor indicator of the maturity of its CSR execution. To paint an accurate picture of a company’s performance — and to identify opportunities for improvement — the authors ultimately suggest that it’s essential to recognize these nuances and calibrate expectations and evaluations accordingly.

Business sustainability aims to combine market logic with social welfare logic. In literature, it is commonly assumed that sustainability and the social welfare logic associated with it are characterized by a long-term orientation. However, this assumption is problematic because this principle may not apply in certain contexts. This qualitative study challenges this assumption and focuses on the mechanisms by which time affects the adoption of sustainability practices in the context of socially responsible investing (SRI) practices in Swiss banks and insurance companies. The article provides insights into the mechanisms associated with different time horizons and investigates their effects on the adoption of SRI in financial intermediaries. It also shows how the dimension of time shapes interactions between the two institutional logics underlying SRI in business organizations through specific mechanisms

Using the example of institutional research on moral issues in organizations and management, we show that most studies neglect values as research object and/or as basis for reflection. The precarious status of values has again a negative effect on institutional research’s (practical) relevance and its theoretical reflexivity. Therefore, we outline how institutional theory is able to equally consider values as object of research and basis for reflection. We label this approach morally reflective institutional analysis. Such an approach can contribute as follows: First, in line with pragmatist thinking, a morally reflective institutional analysis puts specific focus on how findings may be used in practice. This takes account of the concern that institutional theory has lost of its (practical) relevance. Second, by combining normative and descriptive examination, a morally reflective institutional analysis similarly responds to institutionalists calling for more attention to values and those indicating the lack of value-focused reflection. Finally, by developing an approach that considers morality in its descriptive and normative sense, the study allows for merging the hitherto separated paradigms in management research on moral issues, i.e. a normative approach rooted in philosophy and a descriptive approach underpinned by the social sciences.