Diffusion of Corporate Responsibility in the Forestry Sector Natalia Vidal & Robert Kozak Faculty of...
-
Upload
magnus-bridges -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
0
Transcript of Diffusion of Corporate Responsibility in the Forestry Sector Natalia Vidal & Robert Kozak Faculty of...
Diffusion of Corporate Responsibility in the Forestry SectorNatalia Vidal & Robert Kozak
Faculty of ForestryUniversity of British ColumbiaIUFRO All Division 5 ConferenceTaipei, Taiwan – November 1, 2007
sustainable
managementlab
business
Outline Introduction – CR & the forestry sector Study objectives Methods Results
Understanding of CREvolution of CRFramework explaining diffusion of CR
(preliminary results) Key messages
About Corporate Responsibility
No general accepted definition Multiple dimensions (environmental,
social, economic) Need to balance interests of different
stakeholder groups Highly dependent on contextual
characteristics
Corporate Responsibility & Forestry
Corporate Responsibility (CR) has special meaning for the forestry sector Easy target of public criticismOperations have direct environmental impactDepend on sustained extraction of natural
resources
CR & Forestry (cont’d)
Forestry sector provides a great example of variability of CR definitions
Some of the factors that contribute to this variability:Resource managementLand ownershipGovernment regulationsConflicting stakeholder pressuresDifferent manufactured products
Study Objectives
To identify the current understanding of CR in the forestry sector
To identify the recent evolution of CR in the forestry sector
To propose a framework explaining the diffusion of CR into and within forest companies
Methods
•Current understanding of CR
•Recent evolution of CR
Objectives Method
• Framework explaining the diffusion of CR
Content Analysis
Grounded Theory
Methods – Content Analysis
Content Analysis “a technique used to study written material
by breaking it into meaningful units, using carefully applied rules ” (RCR,2006)
Sustainability Reports PwC top 100 forest and paper companiesSoftware: TEXTPACK
Methods – Content Analysis (cont’d)
Dictionary
23 categories (from Tables of Contents): certification to philanthropy
Code TextResult: Frequency
What words to look for
Find words in text
How many times words
appear in text
How TEXTPACK works:
Methods – Grounded Theory
Grounded Theorya research methodology that allows for the
discovery of theory from data (Glaser and Strauss, 1967)
Two countries: Canada & Brazil 3 to 4 companies in each country
High, medium, and low implementation levels of CR
Methods – Grounded Theory (cont’d) In depth, semi-structured personal
interviews Interviews were coded manually Objectives of coding procedure:
To identify categories that describe the phenomenon of study
To understand relationship between categories
Understanding of CR
51 companies of the Top 100 Reports ranged from 2000 to 2005 Interpretation
Frequency of words indicate the importance of that concept in the CR strategies of each company
Evolution of CR
20 companies from the Top 100
Reports in both 2000 and 2005
Categories updated from last analysis
Evolution of CR (cont’d)
2000 2005
Environmental Report 13 3
Annual Report 7 5
Sustainability Report 0 10
Accountability Report 0 1
CR Report 0 1
•361 pages in 2000 to 746 pages in 2005
Types of report:
Evolution of CR (cont’d) Words that appeared only in 2005:
Word Frequency
CSR 92
Union(s) 50
Competitiveness 26
Charitable 21
Sponsorship(s) 16
Volunteers 15
Ethic(s) 14
Charity(ies) 13
Fraud 12
Scholarship(s) 12
Results – Grounded Theory
Preliminary results Two frameworks:
Drivers & evolution of concept within companies
Diffusion of CR to & within companies
Drivers & Evolution of CR within CompaniesExternal Contextual
Characteristics
Internal Contextual
Characteristics
Company-external environment interface
External Drivers
•Stakeholders•Location•Competitors
Internal Drivers
Incremental Changes
Formal Processes• Company policies• Mission statement• Task forces / work groups / councils
• Monitoring performance
• CEO• Inside person• Owners’ / founders’ ethics
• Company culture
Implementation of CR
Diffusion of CREntry point of info
•Consultants•Inside company person•Other (e.g. union trainer)
Company-external environment interface
What to do, what to diffuse
Determining what’s necessary for diffusion & implementation
Standardized behavior
Training
• Company policies• Mission statement• Task forces / work groups / councils
• Monitoring performance
Formal Processes
Setting Priorities
Planning
Guidelines
ImplementationControl Action
Adapt Conceptfe
edba
ck
Key Messages
‘Sustainable Forestry’ seems to be equated to CR
More balanced approach to CR / sustainability Social issues are gaining importance, BUT Environmental issues are still at the core of CR
practices
Economic performance from a CR perspective Perfect balance between all 3 dimensions is
unlikely to happen
Key Messages (cont’d) Grounded Theory results suggest that:
CR is implemented through incremental changes
Certification / EMS serve as basis for diffusion of CR
Points that still need to be addressed:How information flows / diffuses outside of
formal processesSocial activities (inside + outside)
Next steps: identify & test hypotheses
References
Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR), 2006. Data Management Glossary. Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL. http://www.ori.dhhs.gov/education/products/n_illinois_u/datamanagement/dmglossary.html
Glaser, B.G. and Strauss, A.L., 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine de Gruyter, New York.