Authenticity in business sustainability

Abstract

Purpose This paper critiques existing approaches to business sustainability and recommends a new course of action. This paper focuses the critique on sustainable business practices (SBP) and gaining sustainable competitive advantage (SCA), as they have increasingly been the focus of strategy and management scholars. Design/methodology/approach The relative progress in the strategy and management domains is reviewed with regard to incorporation of concepts such as sustainability, corporate social responsibility and stakeholder theory. The defense industry is explored as a paradigmatic case of inauthentic sustainability. Findings Findings reveal that existing constructs lack authentic sustainability, largely on account of the tendency of these discourses to privilege select stakeholders in the developed world. Strategic management research needs to evolve further to accommodate a broader, systemic and global focus that will yield authenticity in business sustainability. Mutual benefit for all stakeholders necessitates a paradigm shift in our thinking from competition to collaboration and creation. Practical implications When SBP and SCA get applied to certain industries, such as defense, they prop up a form of inauthentic sustainability. All global stakeholders must be included in sustainability frameworks, and some businesses, by their very definition, should not be sustained. Social implications Mutual benefit for all stakeholders necessitates a paradigm shift in people’s thinking from competition to collaboration and creation. This paper suggests that Blue Ocean Strategy (BOS) can provide the requisite direction for future strategy scholarship so as to overcome existing limitations with SPB and SCA. Originality/value This paper suggests that BOS can provide the requisite direction for future strategy scholarship so as to overcome existing limitations with SPB and SCA.

Sustainability efforts in the fast fashion industry: consumer perception, trust and purchase intention

“…However, despite a rising concern among consumers, they often hesitate to directly translate their considerations into action (D'Astous and Legendre, 2009), due to several reasons. Fast fashion brands are viewed to be unsustainable due to their nature alone (Joy et al, 2012;Valor, 2007), and sustainability efforts of these companies are frequently questioned and perceived as untruthful (Kang and Hustvedt, 2014;Mahsud et al, 2018). Moreover, consumers often do not feel they can make a difference regarding environmental problems as an individual.…”

How authenticity of corporate social responsibility affects organizational attractiveness: Stakeholder perceptions of organizational ideology

“…Here the authenticity is derived from the internal consistency (Yuan et al, 2011) and congruence between the characteristics of company and its initiative (Becker‐Olsen et al, 2006; Du et al, 2010). The conformity perspective (Lehman et al, 2019), referring to social connectedness, considers whether these efforts conform to its social category—social responsibility by being “embedded in a larger social context” (Mazutis & Slawinski, 2015, p. 138), developmental (McShane & Cunningham, 2012) and, in general, sustainable with “addressing the underlying causes and conditions” in order to “truthfully pursue peace and prosperity” for all stakeholders (Mahsud et al, 2018, p. 679). The company is socially motivated (Alhouti et al, 2016; Su et al, 2020; Tarabashkina et al, 2020) and ensures external consistency of CSR by meeting the demands of stakeholders (Yuan et al, 2011).…”

A conceptual framework combining environmental worldview, organizational learning, and strategic planning contributing to sustainable development

“…The following framework is a concept by Mahsud et al (2018) who elaborated how to overcome limitations in strategic management constructs by introducing what in their literature is called authentic sustainability. Their findings tell that existing construct lacks of authenticity in business sustainability, largely on the account of sustainable business practice (SBP) in gaining sustainable competitive advantage (SCA).…”

“…What will go further at the upper area of the framework is to make sure every effort in the economic system of the organization must be to improve the well-being for all, that is creating value for all stakeholders in an engagement and satisfactory manner within the limits of what nature can sustain, and producing good lives that don't cost the earth (Staniškis et al, 2022). This relevant has been raised by Mahsud et al (2018) in his explanation of achieving authentic sustainability for all stakeholders; sustainability will only be realized when it is conceptualized, specified, implemented, and practiced in a fair manner to all stakeholders whether at local, regional, or global levels. This is also what Damodaran (1999) stresses in his work in corporate finance as the true value when the managers (leaders) do not attempt to mislead or lie to financial markets about their prospects.…”

“…Jusuf et al (2020) use higher education institutions in Indonesia to develop a theory for implementing the concept of sustainability and present the way to establish a more sustainable university organization although with limitation in discussing its financial sustainability. Mahsud et al (2018) bring out analysis from system thinking point of view, combining blue ocean strategy emphasis on value innovation (Kim and Mauborgne, 1999) and integrating sustainable business practices (SBP) with sustainable competitive advantage (SCA) through a win-win perspective for reconciling economics, environmental and social goals. Iqbal (2018) studied the green human resources management (GRHM) as a new way of performance in organization and confirmed that GRHM not only reduces the operating and business expenses but also enhances the relationship of employees' green behaviors with environmental sustainability.…”