Cambridge Books Online

Cambridge Books Online
http://ebooks.cambridge.org/
Creating a Climate for Change Communicating Climate Change and Facilitating Social Change Edited by Susanne C. Moser, Lisa Dilling Book DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511535871 Online ISBN: 9780511535871 Hardback ISBN: 9780521869232 Paperback ISBN: 9780521049924
Chapter 20 - Changing organizational ethics and practices toward climate and e nvironment pp. 303-318 Chapter DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511535871.023 Cambridge University Press
20
Changing organizational ethics and practices toward climate and environment
Keith James
Portland State University
April Smith
Colorado State University
Bob Doppelt
University of Oregon
Introduction
Business organizations play an increasingly important role in the world . . . Companies that win the publics confidence and trust are open, visible, engaging and create business value while delivering benefits to society and the environment. William Ford, Chairman and CEO Ford Motor Company1
Rapid technological changes, pressures created by globalization, competition, and increasing resource constraints make the management of organizational change a critical issue for organizations of all types. The scientific study of organizational change is an interdisciplinary endeavor and it has grown in step with the practical importance of change to organizations. Only a limited part of the science of change literature has, however, directly addressed how to change organizations in ways that would benefit the natural environment, in general, or the Earths climate, in particular. Changing organizations to help address climate change is the focus of this chapter. The force-field model of change At any given time, any mature organization is in reality an epiphenomenon of a dynamic balance between its connections to the outside world and its internal components, processes, and functions. For any attempted organizational change, there will be internal and external forces that both support the
303
Cambridge Books Online Cambridge University Press, 2009 Downloaded from Cambridge Books Online by IP 128.214.2.139 on Wed Oct 17 15:50:19 BST 2012.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511535871.023 Cambridge Books Online Cambridge University Press, 2012
304
James, Smith, and Doppelt
change, and ones that push against it. For a change to occur, therefore, something must move an organization from its current state of balance to a desirable new and relatively sustainable dynamic balance. We will argue that achieving new and environmentally friendly (hereafter green) organization states requires broad and deep change in organizations culture and systems. Kurt Lewins (1951; see also Weick and Quinn, 1999) force-field model of innovation and change is an influential approach to studying organizational change. Lewin suggests that organizational change requires that existing dynamic balances of restraining forces and driving forces be disrupted and the organization guided to a new dynamic balance that better supports the outcomes desired. To do so, a force-field analysis needs to be done to intervene effectively in the field of resistors and drivers. A force-field analysis describes the motives and compulsions currently in play in the organization, along with other motives and compulsions that might help sculpt a new dynamic balance. The type and strength of balancing forces will, however, be unique to each particular organization, and they are likely to change during the course of any innovation effort. In fact, since the parts of a complex organization can change at different rates from each other, the organization as a whole is likely to have multiple levels and currents of environmental orientation at any given time. Consequently, a change agent needs to periodically reanalyze forces and potentially modify the change strategy. Although Lewin did not specifically discuss the problem of transforming organizations for environmental purposes, his research identified some of the common problems that occur in achieving organizational change of any sort. Figure 20.1 lists force types that are most likely to be important in shaping organizational impacts on climate and environment. Our figure modifies Lewins approach to create a list of the likely sticking points (i.e., resistors) in attempts to change organizations to make them more climate-friendly. Change resistors and drivers Change reticence is a natural human response. Moreover, resistance can be healthy. It can force innovators to think carefully through a proposed change and to address legitimate concerns. Thus, evidence of resistance should be taken not as evidence of failure but as an opportunity for change leaders to learn about the dynamics of the organization and improve their concepts and approach, as well as an opportunity to engage and educate
Changing organizational ethics and practices
305
Fig 20.1. A force-field model of organizational change. Source: Based on work of the lead author.
resisting organization members. Below we discuss some of the factors in greater detail.
Organizational culture, regulation, public opinion, politics The factors in this section are grouped together because they are all macrolevel influences and most are closely interrelated. Almost all organizational innovation efforts turn into a political process because they affect entrenched interests, individual and group status and identities, and personal and collective values (Frost and Egri, 1991). Organization members who understand and are invested in an existing system will understandably feel anxious about a new system. One strategy for minimizing political resistance is, therefore, to link the innovation to the values and identities of powerful factions, and to sell it in terms that show it to be a continuation of the companys existing culture and self-image (James, 1993; Bono and Judge, 2003). One public sector organization, for instance, added a green (i.e., vegetated) roof to one of its buildings in large part because it prided itself on its aesthetic qualities and was persuaded that the green roof would significantly improve the buildings beauty. Similarly, communicating a proposed change in exciting, compelling visionary ways can reduce resistance/increase
306
support (Nadler and Heilpern, 1998). Thus the pitching of an innovation, and internal constituency-building and public relations help determine success. External politics also affect internal political resistance. Climate change interests and advocacy groups have typically looked to government as the main mechanism for influencing the behavior of private businesses. Public opinion has, in turn, long been a linchpin for influencing both governments to impose regulations, and businesses to accept them (Sheffrin, 2000). Economic globalization and internal US socio-cultural change have made government both less likely and less able to intervene on environmental issues, however. For instance, globalization allows corporations to shift production outside of countries with restrictive regulatory programs while still accessing the markets in such nations. Corporate interests and allies have become adept at co-opting government leaders and public discourse about the environment. By linking regulation to other public concerns about government officiousness and inefficiency, corporations opposed to environmental regulation have been able to focus the debate around purported negative impacts on the economic well-being of the middle and lower classes (Farey and Lingappa, 1996; Hummel and Stivers, 1998). Moreover, corporate and other anti-regulation interests have also gotten better at framing the debate in terms favorable to their positions (e.g., Rivera and de Leon, 2004; Tilson, 1996; see also McCright, Chapter 12, this volume). Meyers chapter in this volume (Chapter 28) addresses approaches to using extra-organizational politics and public opinion to support environmentallyfriendly organizational change. Technology Making a company environmentally friendly can involve changing technology. In some cases, the technology to make green changes exists but is still new enough to be impractical or too costly to implement (James, 1993). Moreover, it takes time, energy, and resources for an organization and its members to adopt new technologies. New technology also displaces experts on the old technology, who will consequently resist technological change for fear of losing power (or their jobs). Some green change efforts may therefore need to minimize technological change or piggy-back on other pressures toward them. For instance, organizations that take advantage of new technology early may gain marketing advantage or influence on industry standards (see Arroyo and Preston, Chapter 21, this volume). Tying environmentally-friendly technological changes to other benefits such
307
as these can be used to support green change. External drivers such as government tax incentives can also help overcome technological resistance within organizations. Providing time, training, and other resources in support of implementing a new technology also helps reduce resistance to it. Economic resistors, competitive risk, and stockholder resistance Managers and stockholders are most concerned about the short-term bottom line and that can make them resist green innovation. Innovating in a climatefriendly direction can be initially expensive, especially since green technologies and resources are still relatively expensive. Moreover, potential savings and profits from green change cannot be guaranteed even though they will often occur (see the chapters by Atcheson, and Arroyo and Preston, Chapters 22 and 21, this volume). Globalization also militates against organizations acceptance of changes that impose costs. National or regional costs from environmental regulations yield resistance from organizations if global competitors are not subject to the same costs. Organizations that successfully implement green change are likely to have market security and slack resources that insulate them, at least temporarily, from competition and other forces that can create pressure toward minimizing new costs. However, successful organizations also tend to stick with the strategies that brought them success until there is very compelling evidence that it needs to change. The risks of innovation weigh more heavily in decision-making by successful companies than do its potential benefits (Rajagopalan, Rasheed, and Datta, 1993). Change leaders may, therefore, need to focus attention on looming crises with existing strategies and strengthen perceived benefits of change to overcome the inertia of past successes. Structural inertia, herd mentality, and contagion Structural inertia can stem from organizational leadership, organizational designs, governance systems, internal resource allocations and other entrenched elements of an organizations existing system. The whole existing internal structure of an organization creates mass inertia that has to be overcome for any major change to occur (Senior, 2000). Organizations also tend to imitate each other (herd mentality) (Zwiebel, 1995); it is difficult, therefore, to get any organization to adopt a new approach unless many organizations adopt that approach. The combination of herd mentality, structural inertia, and risk aversion means that it will often be relatively new organizations that will be most likely to be major pioneers (Ogbonna and
308
Harris, 2001). Because they usually cannot compete with existing organizations in established markets or on established technologies, they have to try to find or create a new niche or gain an advantage through new technology. Structural inertia also means that successful green change in an existing organization generally requires systemic organizational change. Finally, the herd mentality could be an advantage if the herd could be encouraged to stampede in a green direction. The flip side of herd mentality as a resistor to change is contagion as a trigger for it. Contagion is a change driver that can be difficult to generate but can be powerful if activated. Contagion refers to an infectious adoption of an approach or technology that somehow comes to seem the only way to go. It is a momentum for change that makes it seem inevitable and that can sweep resistance aside quickly and thoroughly. Rogers (1983) discusses it at the individual level of technological innovation in describing how the right group of early adopters who are well connected, charismatic, and influential can trigger a chain-reaction of adoption of an innovation that is almost like a fad. The same can occur in the social climate within which businesses operate. In fact, as with the e-business bubble of the late 1990s, at times contagion does become a fad and can affect individuals and organizations all at once. Governments, non-profits, and concerned individuals may be able to aid contagion toward green organizational policies and technologies by stimulating, seeking out, and supporting key early adopters, be they new organizations or the unusual existing ones that are able to think and move independently of the herd. Organizations with strong and relatively unique visions for the future may do this best (Baum, Locke, and Kirkpatrick, 1998). As is discussed in more detail below, transformational/charismatic leaders are important to promoting compelling organizational visions. The focus needs to be on those organizations that have the critical connections or the cachet to potentially spark contagion. Suttons (1997) model of Catalyst Organizations identifies the features of organizations with the connections and cachet to exert major influence on other organizations.
Resource constraints The availability and affordability of key resources is always a key driver of change within an organization. Scarcity can induce a move toward greater resource use efficiency and/or technological change. Fossil fuel and water costs, for example, are projected to increase in coming decades, and shortages of both are possible. Problems with current resources will promote the
309
search for alternatives or conservation measures will help drive proactive innovation. Pressure from employees and consumers Consumers sometimes vote with their dollars and, by shifting what they will accept or prefer, push organizations to change. For example, Interface, one of the worlds largest producers of commercial flooring, became focused on the environment only after customers began to question the firms environmental policies (Doppelt, 2003, see also Atcheson, Chapter 22, this volume). Employees can also create internal pressures on organizations to change. Their opposition to environmentally harmful practices and creativity in developing and supporting green ones (e.g., those that minimize pollution and greenhouse gas emissions; promote environmental justice; use renewable resources; discourage urban sprawl) have the potential to help drive change. When that happens, employees essentially become change leaders. Thus, the discussion of leadership in the section below applies to them as well as to individuals with official organizational leadership roles. At the extreme, employees create public and regulatory pressure through whistle-blowing. Thus, visions of sustainable and beneficial organizational roles toward the environment can be developed by, and need to be addressed to, workers at all levels, not just formal organizational leaders. Leadership, vision, ethics, and values While the wrong type of leadership can inhibit innovation and environmental responsibility in organizations, the right type of leadership is crucial in securing the success of organizational change. Research indicates that the presence of an innovation champion (or transformational leader) is the most important factor in success of an innovation (Howell and Higgins, 1990). Leaders can promote innovation by scanning the outside environment for innovative ideas and bringing them into an organization; by stimulating and promoting innovations within an organization; or by providing resources for innovation and protecting them from attacks by entrenched interests. Transformational leaders promote innovation. They are inspirational, politically astute, and excellent communicators who engender employee support and loyalty by tying individual empowerment with collective organizational goals (Bass, 1996). Spiritual leadership can also aid change efforts according to a growing body of organizational-behavior research
310
(for a review see Fry, in press). A spiritual leader in an organization is one who cultivates a climate of ethical responsibility, concern, and humanity toward others, and empowerment and creativity among employees (Fry, in press). They are sometimes spiritual in the religious sense, and sometimes simply emphasize moral ideals without invoking religious concepts. In either case, there is evidence that this type of leadership can effectively motivate many workers to commit strongly to the leaders vision for the organization. A spiritual style of leadership may be particularly useful for leading all employees to work toward realization of the green (i.e., environmentally friendly and ethical) company as a salient ideal. Crisis and unintended consequences of change Crisis is a powerful disruptor of existing organizational dynamic balances, and leaders, especially transformational leaders, sometimes try to create a sense of crisis for that very reason. In spite of organizational leaders, managers, and consultants best efforts to systematically alter organizations based on rational analysis of changing environments, opportunities, and risks, the reality seems to be that major change to organizations systems, strategies, or policies rarely happen without the stimulus of a major organizational crisis (King, 1990). Crisis-driven change must be carefully managed, however, or it can easily go wrong. Change rarely results in a clean movement from an organizations current state to a consciously selected target state. The complexity of change makes peregrinations and unanticipated new states likely. Even if the intended target state is reached, it will almost always yield unintended consequences. The direction and configuration of the organization that will result from crisis-generated change is especially likely to differ from what was planned or expected. Green change leaders must, then, continually assess progress and reassess their strategy. They must use creativity to strengthen and broaden promising trends, while weakening the countervailing flows. The force-field approach is useful for presenting the general literature on organizational change and linking it to the specific issue of changing organizations to be more environmentally friendly. The key point to note is that the performance of an organization is the emergent product of the interaction of its parts. The bottom line is that the process of attempting green organizational change is complex, artful as much as scientific, and requires flexibility, creativity, and attention to the multiple constituencies and the often unintended consequences of change-related actions. In the next section,
311
we present an approach to the applied implementation of organizational change for sustainability that has shown promise among some early adopting companies.
An approach to organizational change: The wheel of change toward climate and environmental sustainability Organizations that succeed with going green start in different places and sequence their interventions in different ways, but all tend to follow some version of the approach depicted in Figure 20.2 as the Wheel of Change Toward Sustainability (modified from Doppelt, 2003). We then describe each step in some detail and provide examples.
Create a sustainability imperative Undermining an organizations controlling mental models what Lewin calls unfreezing the organization is necessary for development of green
Figure 20.2. Wheel of change toward sustainability. Source: Doppelt (2003), reprinted with permission from the author.
312
thinking and practices. That is not easy. A major crisis or strong, long-term charismatic leadership is usually required. For instance, Ray Anderson at Interface challenged employees to think green in an emotional speech and followed it with months of change messages (Doppelt, 2003).
Create a vision for a sustainable state and set goals for achieving that vision Clear missions and goals for an organization, along with guidelines for how to achieve them, are needed for green change. Those goals and missions must be presented as a compelling vision. Then, a sustained effort over time is required to ensure that they are pursued. For instance, adoption of a sustainability goal such as company-wide use of energy from renewables needs to be followed by supportive decision-making about specific purchases, processes, and practices.
Organize transition teams to chart a course toward sustainability Rearranging the parts of an organizational system requires broad involvement of organization members and key external stakeholders. A variety of short-term sustainability transition teams can be organized. The dynamics of structuring and operating planning/creative teams is a complex issue in itself that has been the subject of a sizable literature. It is beyond the scope of the current work, but the interested reader is referred to Paulus, Larey, and Dzindolet (2001). Teams must change as people analyze, plan, and implement a change strategy toward an organization that supports environmental sustainability. Each team must be clear about what it is striving to achieve, the role of each member, and the rules that will guide its operations.
Alter the processes and rules within the system Systemic change requires altering the rules about how work gets done in the organization. Successful green-change efforts tend to focus on both operational and governance rules. For instance, in the early 1990s, the Xerox Corporation adopted the vision of becoming Waste Free. The vision catalyzed changing operations all the way back to the initial designs. In addition, decision-making was decentralized. By the end of 2001, the equivalent of 1.8 million printers and copiers were reused or recycled,
313
and many other environmental initiatives were under way (Maslennikova and Foley, 2000).
Communicate and reinforce the need, vision, and strategies for achieving sustainability Even with approaches 14, progress will stall without the effective and consistent exchange of information. A constant exchange of information by all employees, up, down, and laterally in the organizations structure about the environmental initiatives need, purpose, strategies, and benefits will promote sustainable change.
Institute mechanisms to stimulate learning and innovation Even with excellent strategies, obstacles will surface. To overcome them, feedback and learning mechanisms must be put in place or broadened and strengthened so that the identification of sustainability opportunities, the vision, planning skills, any specialized knowledge and expertise needed to implement selected initiatives are developed and shared. Organizations successful at change provide frequent, accurate, timely information on progress and setbacks toward goals and vision. They also reward experimentation and share its lessons.
Make sustainability standard operating procedure As a change initiative progresses and new practices emerge, the new dynamic must be institutionalized. Efforts must be made to embed environmental sustainability in standard operating procedures and culture. This will be an ongoing process. Change toward sustainability is iterative. The Wheel of Change must continually roll forward. The case study of the Herman Miller Company (Textbox 20.1) shows how one company used the steps and strategies just outlined to move toward being a more sustainable company. We have detailed the internal process of change of organizations toward states that are friendly to the natural environment. The raw-material specifications for suppliers mentioned in the Herman Miller example began to touch on how changes in one organization can begin to influence others. We expand on this idea with a description of an organization that is modeling for and catalyzing changes in many others.
314
Textbox 20.1 Steps toward sustainability at Herman Miller Company

The Herman Miller Company (www.hermanmiller.com) designs, manufactures, and sells furniture systems and products for offices and healthcare facilities. Herman Miller adopted a vision of becoming a sustainable business and a strategy of reducing and eliminating environmental impacts throughout the entire company. The goal was to identify problem areas and incorporate environmentally friendly materials and manufacturing processes into new product designs. Herman Miller adjusted its governance system to further empower employees to take responsibility for the environment. Decision-making was decentralized to the lowest level possible. People were rewarded when they produced better-quality products with reduced environmental impacts. Teams were formed to identify potential environmental impacts of materials and products and to develop green alternatives. The Design for the Environment (DFE) product development team, for example, started the process by coming up with their own specifications, such as dont glue things together if you can use screws. Institutionalization occurs, for example, by incorporating green approaches into a standard checklist for product development. The checklist is also provided to suppliers so that the company can influence the materials in the feedstocks it purchases. Herman Miller President Paul Murray says: Because we share the benefits, every employee benefits from increased sales and reduced costs due to less energy use and packaging and other savings our environmental programs produce . . . . Total environmental savings on energy and packaging alone is conservatively estimated to be in the millions of dollars (cited in Doppelt, 2003:168).
Sutton (1997) presents a framework of types of organizational environmental efforts. His framework starts, at the lowest level of change, with Ethical Opportunist organizations, which is a focus on using supposedly environmentally friendly policies and actions mainly for marketing and public-relations purposes. A Pioneering organization (e.g., Toyota and its Prius) finds a way to make an innovation technically or economically feasible for itself. The most advanced companies in this scheme are Catalysts, which both adopt their own, genuine, environment-friendly policies and practices and also act in ways that encourage other organizations to adopt such policies and practices. Change tends to progress in fits and starts that produce a closer and closer approximation of the target state over time. Thus policies and practices toward the environment, if they change, are likely to progress through some sequence of the stages that Sutton proposes rather than flash directly to the Catalyst state. The case study of
315
Textbox 20.2 Catalyst of wider change

Silran2 Homes (not the companys real name) started in the 1960s as a standard home-building and community development company. In the late 1980s, however, its founder and president became interested, first, in solar energy technologies and then, later, in ideas for creating sustainable communities. Now Silran concentrates on building homes and communities that are largely energy self-sufficient and low in greenhouse gas impacts. Homes in one Silran development, for instance, have four-foot thick rammed earth walls that insulate well enough by themselves to keep average internal temperatures within a 10 Fahrenheit range all year round. All of the homes are also equipped with photovoltaic power cells for electricity generation, as well as passive-solar heat collection designs and heat deflection landscaping for summer. The home designs not only allow buyers to live in energy and environment-friendly ways; they also provide business to solar technology companies and to subcontractors skilled at environmentally friendly building techniques. The community in which those homes sit also has bike and pedestrian pathways that link to retail establishments. That makes if possible for residents to acquire at least some necessities and creature comforts without driving. Because they have a strong base of environmentally conscious customers, many of the businesses in the retail sector tend to feature environmentally friendly products. Thus the Silran approach catalyzes green-friendly changes involving individual customers, corporate suppliers, and retail establishments.
Silran Homes (Textbox 20.2) describes what a catalyst organization can potentially achieve.
Conclusions Change leaders in organizations, advocacy groups, and government oversight bodies often focus on the driving forces that push change. However, those who have studied organizational change indicate that most failures of change efforts result from unmanaged resistors more than weakness of drivers. An obvious conclusion would seem to be that those who want to create green organizations should focus as much or more on weakening or removing the restraints that are keeping an organizations environmental approaches fixed in their current state. Organizational change is difficult to achieve and change management is a complex processes in any case. This is especially true relative to efforts to get organizations to alter their policies and practices toward climate change
316
because future potential economic benefits of doing so are pitted against immediate, bottom-line pressures and costs. As Doppelts (2003) research showed, climate advocates and climate scientists need to present visionary, positive messages; find the best possible organizational leaders and organizations allies, rather than waiting for ideal allies; be flexible and use creative approaches to provoking and guiding organizational change; and recognize that change is an ongoing process that can result in unintended consequences. Clearly, there is substantial room to increase the extent to which private sector corporations and market forces support and contribute to environmental sustainability. In the reality of the globalized, capitalistic modern world, market pressures have increased significantly in most economic sectors, so marshalling other market forces that support sustainability is probably critical to move companies toward green processes and practices. Climate change appears chaotic on the surface but changes in it are linked by identifiable underlying patterns. The same seems to be true of change in organizations toward sustainability. By seeing organizations as dynamic, chaotic systems and analyzing the patterns of flow and creatively wielding our paddles, we may be able to guide organizations and the Earth through the challenge of climate change.
Notes
1. Inauguration of The Global Reporting Initiative, April 2002, at the United Nations, New York City. Quoted in the Sustainable Investment Research Institute Newsletter (28), August 16. 2. Silran is a pastiche that is based on two different home and community development companies. It is an original case study composed specifically for this chapter based on the first authors personal involvement with the two companies.
References
Bass, B. M. (1996). A New Paradigm of Leadership: An Inquiry into Transformational Leadership. Alexandria, VA: US Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences. Baum, J. R., Locke, E. A., and Kirkpatrick, S. A. (1998). A longitudinal study of the relation of vision and vision communication to venture growth in entrepreneurial firms. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 4354. Bono, J. E. and Judge, T. A. (2003). Core self-evaluations: A review of the trait and its role in job satisfaction and job performance. European Journal of Personality, 17 (Suppl. 1), S5S18. Doppelt, R. (2003). Leading Change Toward Sustainability: A Change Management Guide for Business, Government, and Civil Society. Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf Publishing.
317
Farey, K. and Lingappa, V. R. (1996). Californias proposition 186: Lessons from a single-payer health care reform ballot initiative campaign. Journal of Public Health Policy, 17, 13352. Frost, P. J. and Egri, C. P. (1991). The political process of innovation. In Research in organizational behavior, eds. Staw, B. M. and Cummings, L. L. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press: pp. 22995. Fry, L. W. (2005). Toward a theory of ethical and spiritual well-being, and corporate social responsibility through spiritual leadership. In Positive Psychology in Business Ethics and Corporate Responsibility, eds. Giacalone, R. A. and Jurkiewicz, C. L. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing, pp. 4783. Howell, J. and Higgins, C. (1990). Champions of technological innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 31741. Hummel, R. P. and Stivers, C. M. (1998). Government isnt us. In Government Is Us: Strategies for an Anti-Government Era, eds. King, C. and Stivers, C. M. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. James, K. (1993). Perceived self-relevance of technology as an influence on attitudes and information retention. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 29, 5675. King, N. (1990). Innovation at work: The research literature. In Innovation and Creativity at Work, eds. West, M. A. and Farr, J. L. New York: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, pp. 1559. Lewin, K. (1951). Field Theory in Social Science. New York: Harper & Row. Maslennikova, I. and Foley, D. (2000). Xeroxs approach to sustainability. Interfaces, 30, 22633. Nadler, D. A. and Heilpern, J. D. (1998). The CEO in the context of discontinuous change. In Navigating Change: How CEOs, Top Teams, and Boards Steer Transformation, eds. Hambrick, D. C., Nadler, D. A., and Tushman, M. L. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Ogbonna, E. and Harris, L. C. (2001). The founders legacy: Hangover or inheritance? British Journal of Management, 12, 1331. Paulus, P. B., Larey, T. S., and Dzindolet, M. T. (2001). Creativity in groups and teams. In Groups at Work, ed. Turner, M. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 31938. Rajagopalan, N., Rasheed, A. M. A., and Datta, D. K. (1993). Strategic decision processes: Critical review and future directions. Journal of Management, 19, 34984. Rivera, J. and de Leon, P. (2004). Is greener whiter? Voluntary environmental performance of western ski areas. Policy Studies Journal, 32, 41737. Rogers, E. (1983). Diffusion of Innovations. New York: The Free Press. Senior, B. (2000). Organizational change and development. In Introduction to Work and Organizational Psychology: A European Perspective, ed. Chmiel, N. Malden, MA: Blackwell, pp. 34783. Sheffrin, S. M. (2000). Regulation, politics, and interest groups: What do we learn from an historical approach? Critical Review, 14, 25969. Sutton, P. (1997). The Sustainability-Promoting Firm: An Essential Player in the Politics of Sustainability. Paper presented at the Ecopolitics Conference XI, Melbourne, Australia, October. Tilson, D. J. (1996). Promoting a greener image of nuclear power in the US and Britain. Public Relations Review, 22, 6379.
318
Weick, K. E. and Quinn, R. E. (1999). Organizational change and development. In Annual Review of Psychology, eds. Spence, J. T., Darley, J. M., and Fos, D. J. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews, Inc., 50, pp. 36186. Zwiebel, J. (1995). Corporate conservatism and relative compensation. Journal of Political Economy, 103, 125.

Cambridge Books Online

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Cambridge Books Online

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Cambridge Books Online

James, Smith, and Doppelt

Changing organizational ethics and practices

James, Smith, and Doppelt

Changing organizational ethics and practices

James, Smith, and Doppelt

Changing organizational ethics and practices

James, Smith, and Doppelt

Changing organizational ethics and practices

James, Smith, and Doppelt

Changing organizational ethics and practices

James, Smith, and Doppelt

Textbox 20.1 Steps toward sustainability at Herman Miller Company

Changing organizational ethics and practices

Textbox 20.2 Catalyst of wider change

James, Smith, and Doppelt

Changing organizational ethics and practices

James, Smith, and Doppelt

Você também pode gostar