A balance model of theoretical sustainability – framework and propositions

• Published date: 01 February 2016
• Pages: 21-34
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-01-2015-0006
• Date: 01 February 2016
• Author: David Eriksson,Göran Svensson
• Subject Matter: Strategy,Corporate governance

A balance model of theoretical

sustainability – framework and

propositions

David Eriksson and Göran Svensson

David Eriksson is

Researcher and Lecturer

at the Swedish School of

Textiles, University of

Borås, Borås, Sweden.

Göran Svensson is based

at the Oslo School of

Management, Oslo,

Norway.

Abstract

Purpose –This paper aims to describe and discuss a balance model of theoretical business

sustainability, to leverage the inferior side, so as to enhance performance.

Design/methodology/approach –A conceptual description and discussion are provided, along with

an empirical depiction.

Findings –The empirical illustration presents one organization that embodies the goals of theoretical

business sustainability in the marketplace and society.

Research limitations/implications –Further research is needed to enhance our understanding of the

phenomenon and performance of business sustainability in supply chains.

Practical implications –Findings highlight that there is no justification for practitioners to strive

consistently for anything other than theoretical business sustainability, and stakeholders need to push

organizations in that direction.

Originality/value –The paper contributes to our understanding of what should be done and why

business sustainability performance should be improved in supply chains.

Keywords Business sustainability, Corporate social responsibility,

Supply chain management (SCM), Concurrent engineering (CE)

Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction

A recent increase in concern for the planet Earth is evident in both research and practice

(Fassin and Van Rossem, 2009;Aguinis and Glavas, 2012;Winter and Knemeyer, 2013).

However, over and over again, we see evidence of companies that fail to meet the moral

expectations of their stakeholders (Svensson and Bååth, 2008). People continue to commit

actions with an apparent lack of concern for those they affect (Batson and Thompson,

2001;Batson, 2011).

The concept of sustainability has evolved from being concerned mainly with environmental

issues to a broader perspective that includes economic, environmental and social aspects

(Asif et al., 2011). Sustainable development may nowadays be defined as development

which meets the economic, environmental and social needs of the present, without

compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (WCED, 1987;

Elkington, 1997). Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is defined similarly as “[. . .]

context-specific organizational actions and policies that take into account stakeholders’

expectations and the triple bottom line of economic, social, and environmental

performance [. . .]” (Aguinis and Glavas, 2012, p. 855).

According to Fassin and Van Rossem (2009), the concepts of sustainability and CSR are

considered interchangeable by both scholars and practitioners. However, an important

distinction between the two concepts is that sustainability has a clear focus on long-term

aspects, while CSR (relatively speaking) focuses more on short-term aspects (Bansal and

Received 12 January 2015

Revised 30 September 2015

7 October 2015

Accepted 19 October 2015

DOI 10.1108/CG-01-2015-0006 VOL. 16 NO. 1 2016, pp. 21-34, © Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1472-0701 CORPORATE GOVERNANCE PAGE 21