Search

This special feature section of Journal of Management & Organization (Volume 17/1 - March 2011) sets out to widen understanding of the processes of stability and change in today's organizations, with a particular emphasis on the contribution of institutional approaches to organizational studies. Institutional perspectives on organization theory assume that rational, economic calculations, such as the maximization of profits or the optimization of resource allocation, are not sufficient to understand the behavior of organizations and their strategic choices. Institutionalists acknowledge the great uncertainty associated with the conduct of organizations and suggest that taken-for-granted values, beliefs and meanings within and outside organizations also play an important role in the determination of legitimate action.

This paper places corporate social responsibility in the context of the resource-based view of the firm, and then uses relationship management to explain the growing involvement of business in corporate social responsibility activities. It argues that the value of the public relations function to the enterprise is its capacity to aid relationship management, but at a level linked to corporate strategy rather than the communications-output perspective common to much public relations practice. In doing so, the paper views corporate social responsibility as a facilitator of relationship management, and thus building support networks for the organisation, instead of viewing corporate social responsibility as a set of activities that act as vehicles for building organisational legitimacy through the management of perceptions. Such a perspective adds to the growing focus in the public relations literature on the role of relationship management as a central rationale. It uses a case study approach to apply the concept to a single multinational firm in the building and construction industry. The paper identifies a series of specific public relations practices within CSR programs that are used to manage relationships. As a result, these relationships are not easily reproduced by other organisations.

The proliferation of innovative schemes to address climate change at international, national and local levels signals a fundamental shift in the priority and role of the natural environment to society, organizations and individuals. This shift in shared priorities invites academics and practitioners to consider the role of institutions in shaping and constraining responses to climate change at multiple levels of organisations and society. Institutional theory provides an approach to conceptualising and addressing climate change challenges by focusing on the central logics that guide society, organizations and individuals and their material and symbolic relationship to the environment. For example, framing a response to climate change in the form of an emission trading scheme evidences a practice informed by a capitalist market logic (Friedland and Alford 1991). However, not all responses need necessarily align with a market logic. Indeed, Thornton (2004) identifies six broad societal sectors each with its own logic (markets, corporations, professions, states, families, religions). Hence, understanding the logics that underpin successful –and unsuccessful– climate change initiatives contributes to revealing how institutions shape and constrain practices, and provides valuable insights for policy makers and organizations. This paper develops models and propositions to consider the construction of, and challenges to, climate change initiatives based on institutional logics (Thornton and Ocasio 2008). We propose that the challenge of understanding and explaining how climate change initiatives are successfully adopted be examined in terms of their institutional logics, and how these logics evolve over time. To achieve this, a multi-level framework of analysis that encompasses society, organizations and individuals is necessary (Friedland and Alford 1991). However, to date most extant studies of institutional logics have tended to emphasize one level over the others (Thornton and Ocasio 2008: 104). In addition, existing studies related to climate change initiatives have largely been descriptive (e.g. Braun 2008) or prescriptive (e.g. Boiral 2006) in terms of the suitability of particular practices. This paper contributes to the literature on logics by examining multiple levels: the proliferation of the climate change agenda provides a site in which to study how institutional logics are played out across multiple, yet embedded levels within society through institutional forums in which change takes place. Secondly, the paper specifically examines how institutional logics provide society with organising principles –material practices and symbolic constructions– which enable and constrain their actions and help define their motives and identity. Based on this model, we develop a series of propositions of the conditions required for the successful introduction of climate change initiatives. The paper proceeds as follows. We present a review of literature related to institutional logics and develop a generic model of the process of the operation of institutional logics. We then consider how this is applied to key initiatives related to climate change. Finally, we develop a series of propositions which might guide insights into the successful implementation of climate change practices.

Corporate Social Responsibility remains an ambiguous and evasive concept: differentiated ethical perspectives, varying stakeholder power across countries and institutional fields, and fragmented regulatory frameworks, all open up spaces for negotiation and social construction of local/contingent understandings of what it means to be ‘socially responsible’. In this study, we explore the processes of construction of social responsibility in the Australian Energy Industry. In relation to CSR, the Australian regulatory framework is biased towards environmental consequences and the preservation of the natural environment. In addition, public firms are also subject to corporate governance rules (CLERP9) aligned with international standards (UK, USA). There are also legal requirements in relation to aboriginal minorities on traditionally-owned land. Together, these elements define the spaces and themes around which social responsibility is constructed. Our research investigates what CSR practices are considered to be legitimate in this context. Using mixed methods –content analysis of secondary sources, corporate documents, and media reports, complemented by interviews with a range of actors from the field, including industry managers, government officials, and social/community activists- we construct an understanding of legitimate CSR practices. The research provides three contributions: - an understanding of CSR in the context of the Australian energy industry which may be used a reference case for international comparison - the identification of legitimate practices, which would contribute to inform corporate policy decisions in relation to CSR - a study of how legitimacy is constructed in a field where competing logics operate

In this paper we elaborate on the theme of professions, institutions and change through conceptualizing the processes of professionalization and institutionalization in terms of duality of structure. We investigate how processes of professionalization promote the transnational diffusion and translation of institutional logics and extends the role of professions in promoting global institutional standards. This is achieved in the context of a longitudinal study of how corporate social responsibility has been diffused and translated across four organizations in the Australian banking industry, setting the foundations for CSR as a legitimate business practice in that country.

Non-Western practitioners across the globe instinctively attempt to implement Western-based public relations models and theories, often unsuccessfully, regardless of their surrounding environment. This paper reviews business practices and reveals that in Europe, company interests are a main priority, while in Asia, the line between business and personal relationships is extremely blurred. Cultural dimensions and topois were even more varied between the three regions. Implications for the adoption of Western models of public relations practice are discussed.