ESG: disentangling the governance pillar

Impacts of big data analytics adoption on firm sustainability performance

“…By adopting BDA along with maintaining sustainable investing, firms are perceived to develop their business process and DYC (Capurro et al, 2021;McBride and Philippou, 2022). These two capabilities could improve their financial and operational performance (OPP) by both investing in technological innovation and following ESG principles (Monteiro et al, 2021). The present study has contributed that BDA applications can enhance the efficiency of business process performance (BPP) and DYC of firms, impacting their financial and OPP, which could help to improve the sustainable performance of the firms.…”

Ownership competence: The enabling and constraining role of institutions

“…In their recent comment on our paper, Monteiro and Miranda (2022) grant our paper “opens the ‘black box’ of ownership” by highlighting the role of competent judgment in coordinating resources through ownership rights. However, they argue that our paper leaves other black boxes unopened, in particular, the role that the institutional context plays in granting and shaping the three ownership rights essential to competent resource coordination.…”

“…For instance, one could make a case for adding competencies related to demand, supply, technology, competitive interactions, and more. Second, we unpack and expand on three main arguments or questions implicitly raised by Monteiro and Miranda (2022) on the interplay between ownership competence and institutional uncertainty, namely that (a) both specific owners and society at large benefit from ownership competence, (b) ownership by some owners may cause harm to other owners, and (c) property rights enforcement and ownership competence operate as complements in generating both private and societal benefits.…”

“…They therefore argue that identifying the institutional setting that maximizes the contribution of use rights, appropriation rights, or transfer rights to value creation is an independent fourth dimension of ownership competence, what they call “institutional competence,” defined as the ability to “evaluate the characteristics of diverse institutional environments and assess the impact of formal and informal rules on the feasible options for deploying resources” (p. 8). Monteiro and Miranda (2022) claim that this competence is manifest in skillfully selecting where to own, but also in skillfully evaluating how such institutional factors influence the exercise of matching, governance, and timing competence.…”

“…However, we do not think that adding an entirely new competence to our model—one that, unlike the others, lacks an associated enabling property right—as well as several new paths of influence is the best way to analyze the role of institutions. Instead, the more theoretically parsimonious path forward is to highlight, as Monteiro and Miranda (2022) do at the end of their comment, the manner in which institutional features (including institutional uncertainty) shape the underlying property rights that define an owner's capacity to wield matching, governance, and timing competence.…”