The power of the social domain in sustainable development: non-market strategies for generating sustainable competitive advantage

Thiel, Monica

doi:10.1504/ijisd.2017.083304

Cited by 12 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…First, we contribute to the literature on competition at the individual level. Competition is a prevalent phenomenon ( Thiel, 2017 ) and is viewed a component of basic human nature ( Churchill et al, 1997 ; Klein and Miller, 1998 ; Matsumoto and Willingham, 2006 ; Dohmen et al, 2011 ). The existing research mainly focuses on static factors, such as trait competitiveness ( Spence and Helmreich, 1983 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Competition and/or competitive advantage have been considered the most important survival method for individuals, organizations, and society ( Thiel, 2017 ). It is even viewed as a component of human nature ( Churchill et al, 1997 ; Klein and Miller, 1998 ; Matsumoto and Willingham, 2006 ; Dohmen et al, 2011 ), and human beings develop through competition with the environment and within the species ( Kohn, 1992 ; Carroll and Tomas, 1995 ; Pfeffer and Sutton, 2000 ; Birkinshaw, 2001 ; Marino and Zábojník, 2004 ; De Waal-Andrews and Van Beest, 2018 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Employee Competitive Attitude and Competitive Behavior Promote Job-Crafting and Performance: A Two-Component Dynamic Model

Wang¹,

Wang

Liu

2018

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While competition has become increasingly fierce in organizations and in the broader market, the research on competition at an individual level is limited. Most existing research focuses on trait competitiveness. We argue that employee competitiveness can be state-like and can be demonstrated as an attitude toward and behavior representative of competition. We therefore propose a dynamic model with two separate components: competitive attitude and competitive behavior. Drawing upon self-determination theory and the person–environment interaction perspective, we examine how employee competitive attitude and competitive behavior can be influenced by both personal characteristics and team climate, which in turn leads to different work outcomes, as demonstrated in two studies. Study 1 developed measures for competitive attitude and competitive behavior. Study 2 collected data from salespeople in a large insurance company in three waves. The results showed that employee competitive attitude and behavior could be predicted by personality. Moreover, employee competitive attitude and behavior were related to sales performance in differential ways via job crafting, and these mediated relationships could be moderated by team climate. These findings support the two-component dynamic model combining competitive attitude and behavior, which helps promote understanding of the dynamics of competition and its consequences at the individual level. Theoretical and practical implications are also discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Employee Competitive Attitude and Competitive Behavior Promote Job-Crafting and Performance: A Two-Component Dynamic Model

Wang¹,

Wang

Liu

2018

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Corporate sustainability juxtaposes economic, social, and environmental goals in parallel (Bansal, 2005;Schaltegger et al, 2016) to achieve overall social welfare (Schwartz and Carroll, 2008). Organizations that proactively take up their social responsibility display impressive competitiveness and vitality (Thiel, 2017;Ivory and Brooks, 2018;Daddi et al, 2019). Meanwhile, socially or environmentally irresponsible behavior still commonly occurs, even though it hurts the companies' image and reputation (Lin-Hi and Müller, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Corporate Sustainability Paradox Management: A Systematic Review and Future Agenda

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasing evidence suggests that corporate sustainability is paradoxical in nature, as corporates and managers have to achieve economic, social, and environmental goals, simultaneously. While a paradox perspective has been broadly incorporated into sustainability research for more than a decade, it has resulted in limited improvement in our understanding of corporate sustainability paradox management. In this study, the authors conduct a systematic review of the literature of corporate sustainability paradox management by adopting the Smith–Lewis three-stage model of dynamic equilibrium. The results reveal the following: (1) Both environmental and cognitive factors manifest tensions arising from the sustainability paradox. (2) While both proactive and defensive strategies are adopted to manage the tensions embedded in the corporate sustainability, the proactive strategy is more extensively studied in the current literature. (3) Management strategies of corporate sustainability paradox are characterized as multi-level, multi-stage, and dealing with multiple paradoxes. (4) Proactive strategies enable organizations to enjoy short-term and long-term sustainability benefits. The authors call for further research explicitly addressing the following areas: (1) the paradoxical nature of corporate sustainability management; (2) corporate sustainability paradox management of for-profit organizations; (3) the micro-foundations of corporate sustainability paradox management; (4) defensive strategies and new proactive strategies; and (5) a unified standard of sustainability outcomes. The practical implications of this review are then elaborated. In practice, the results imply that organizations would best manage the corporate sustainability paradox by understanding the paradox and its equilibrium stages. This review and proposed research agenda are expected to deepen interdisciplinary knowledge and set the stage for interested scholars to undertake in their future inquiries.

show abstract

“…Currently, there is little literature addressing human and social competition within corporate social responsibility (CSR) and sustainability concepts (Thiel, 2017). Most literature about human and social competition discuss primarily sports competition (Bardel et al , 2010; Kristiansen and Roberts, 2010), managing people for organizational competitive success within organizational behavior (House and Rizzo, 1972; Pfeffer, 1995), followed by social psychology (Tauer and Harackiewicz, 1999) and paleoanthropology, cognitive psychology and neurobiology (Flinn et al , 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accelerating environmental responsibility through societal governance

Thiel

2017

JGR

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This paper aims to critically reflect on how societal governance can drive environmental responsibility instead of being used as a support mechanism for other domains in sustainable development and corporate social responsibility. Design/methodology/approach There is little discussion in the literature about the individual and social-specific issues and challenges of human and social competition within environmental responsibility. The primary objective of this literature review is to examine how societal governance may decrease environmental responsibility in cross-sector partnerships, especially within the confines of human and social competition. Findings Society is competing at differing levels and strategies, thereby creating changing social and environmental contexts for firms that can limit firm competitive advantage and environmental responsibility. Practical implications Critically reviewing societal governance apart from economic and environmental domains permits reasonably sound inferences about unmeasured social conditions or situations; thus, permitting greater understanding of not only what is happening and where it is happening but also why it is happening. Social implications Society is an underplayed actor than currently portrayed in the literature to drive environmental responsibility within human and social competition in cross-sector partnerships. Originality/value This review bridges individual and social aspects of governance and competition within and outside of the firm because society is competing in different contexts that can impact private and public sector environmental responsibility performance.

show abstract

The power of the social domain in sustainable development: non-market strategies for generating sustainable competitive advantage

Cited by 12 publications

References 0 publications

Employee Competitive Attitude and Competitive Behavior Promote Job-Crafting and Performance: A Two-Component Dynamic Model

Employee Competitive Attitude and Competitive Behavior Promote Job-Crafting and Performance: A Two-Component Dynamic Model

Corporate Sustainability Paradox Management: A Systematic Review and Future Agenda

Accelerating environmental responsibility through societal governance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About