سامانه پشتیبانی خدمات اطلاعات

  اخبار و اعلانات

 آمار

تعداد نشریات158
تعداد شماره‌ها6,223
تعداد مقالات67,680
تعداد مشاهده مقاله114,882,461
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله89,554,359
رجب پور, ابراهیم, مرادی, محمد. (1400). تحلیل و توسعه نهادی مسئولیت اجتماعی سازمان‌ها: رویکردی آمیخته. , 13(4), 929-952. doi: 10.22059/jibm.2021.328677.4183
ابراهیم رجب پور; محمد مرادی. "تحلیل و توسعه نهادی مسئولیت اجتماعی سازمان‌ها: رویکردی آمیخته". , 13, 4, 1400, 929-952. doi: 10.22059/jibm.2021.328677.4183
رجب پور, ابراهیم, مرادی, محمد. (1400). 'تحلیل و توسعه نهادی مسئولیت اجتماعی سازمان‌ها: رویکردی آمیخته', , 13(4), pp. 929-952. doi: 10.22059/jibm.2021.328677.4183
رجب پور, ابراهیم, مرادی, محمد. تحلیل و توسعه نهادی مسئولیت اجتماعی سازمان‌ها: رویکردی آمیخته. , 1400; 13(4): 929-952. doi: 10.22059/jibm.2021.328677.4183

تحلیل و توسعه نهادی مسئولیت اجتماعی سازمان‌ها: رویکردی آمیخته

مدیریت بازرگانی
دوره 13، شماره 4، 1400، صفحه 929-952    اصل مقاله (1.4 M)
نوع مقاله: مقاله علمی پژوهشی
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jibm.2021.328677.4183
نویسندگان
ابراهیم رجب پور* 1؛ محمد مرادی2
1استادیار، گروه مدیریت بازرگانی، دانشکده کسب و کار و اقتصاد، دانشگاه خلیج فارس، بوشهر، ایران.
2دکترا، مدیریت منابع انسانی، گروه مدیریت و حسابداری، دانشگاه زنجان، زنجان، ایران
چکیده
هدف: پژوهش حاضر به‌دنبال توسعه و بهبود مفهوم مسئولیت اجتماعی سازمان‌ها است. برای این منظور از چارچوب تحلیل و توسعه نهادی بهره‌گیری شد تا به این سئوال پاسخ داده شود که در قالب نگرش نهادی، مسئولیت اجتماعی سازمان‌ها چگونه خواهد بود؟ و آیا می‌توان مدلی برای شکل‌گیری مسئولیت اجتماعی سازمان‌ها ارائه داد؟
روش: پارادایم پژوهش، تفسیرگرایی و رویکرد آن کیفی بود. برای اجرای پژوهش، استراتژی مطالعه موردی و برای تحلیل داده‏ها از روش تحلیل محتوای کیفی، دلفی فازی و دیمتل استفاده شد.
یافته‌ها: مصاحبه‌های انجام‌شده با تحلیل محتوای کیفی و نرم افزار مکس‌کیودا بررسی و هفت مفهوم اصلی: هنجارها و اصول اخلاقی، مشروعیت اجتماعی، فرهنگ‌سازی، رعایت قوانین و مقررات، فشارهای نهادی، ویژگی‌های جامعه، شرایط مادی/فیزیکی جامعه، استخراج شدند. به‌منظور جمع‌بندی نظر خبرگان در مورد ارتباط بین مفاهیم اصلی استخراج شده از مصاحبه‌ها به روش دلفی فازی، نتایج به هشت نفر از اساتید دانشگاه در حوزه مدیریت و سازمان و پنج نفر از مدیران با سابقه ارسال شد. پس از سه مرتبه تحلیل و جمع‌بندی نظرات، سه متغیر اصلی و چهار متغیر به عنوان میانجی مشخص شدند.
نتیجه‌گیری: نتایج حاکی از این است که مسئولیت اجتماعی سازمان‌ها به خودی خود و در خلاء اجتماعی اتفاق نمی‌افتد و مناسبات اجتماعی مرتبط با این حوزه مسئولیت سازمان‌ها که به‌منظور تحقق مشروعیت درونی و بیرونی سازمان می‌باشند، باید در قالب‌های هنجاری، اخلاقی و یا فرهنگی مدنظر قرار داد. البته در این میان، قوانین، فشارهای نهادی، ویژگی‌های جامعه و شرایط اقتصادی سازمان‌ها نیز تأثیرگذار می‌باشند.
کلیدواژه‌ها
تحلیل و توسعه نهادی؛ مسئولیت اجتماعی سازمان‌ها؛ مشروعیت درونی؛ مشروعیت بیرونی؛ نهادها
عنوان مقاله [English]
Institutional Analysis and Development of Organizational Social Responsibility: A Mixed Approach
نویسندگان [English]
Ebrahim Rajabpour1؛ Mohammad Moradi2
1Assistant Professor, Department of Business Administration, Faculty of Business and Economics, Persian Gulf University, Bushehr, Iran.
2Ph.D., Human Resource Management, Instructor, Department of Management and Accounting, Zanjan University, Zanjan, Iran.
چکیده [English]
Objective
This study sought to develop and improve the concept of corporate social responsibility. Accordingly, the Institutional Analysis and Development Framework (IAD) was used to answer the following question: What are the social responsibilities of organizations regarding the institutional viewpoint? Is it possible to provide a model for the social responsibility of organizations?
 
Methodology
The research paradigm was interpretive with a qualitative approach. This was a case study and qualitative content analysis research. Fuzzy Delphi and DEMATEL were used to analyze the gathered data. Data were collected by in-depth unstructured interviews and the snowball sampling method was applied to select the interviewees. After conducting the interviews and analyzing the data, the fuzzy Delphi method was used to identify the institutional factors affecting the development and improvement of corporate social responsibility.
 
Findings
The interviews were analyzed via qualitative content analysis and by MAXQDA software. Accordingly, seven main concepts were extracted: norms and ethical principles, social legitimacy, culture building, observance of rules and regulations, institutional pressures, characteristics of society, material or physical conditions of society. In order to summarize the experts' opinions about the relationship among the main concepts derived from the interviews, the results were sent to eight university professors as well as five experienced managers. After three times of analyzing and summarizing the comments, irrelevant or very insignificant concepts were removed. Eventually, three main variables and four mediating variables were identified.
 
 
Conclusion
To develop and improve the concept of corporate social responsibility with an institutional perspective, the framework of institutional analysis and development was used to identify cultural and social characteristics in society, laws, and regulations related to corporate social responsibility, and to clarify how managers adhere to these rules. Also, during the interactions of individuals, the role of unwritten norms and rules related to social responsibility and the capacity to guide or prevent laws and norms in guiding behaviors were considered. The results proved that laws and regulations have a mediating and marginal role in the formation of social responsibility of organizations, but how to implement the laws is a part of corporate social responsibility. The obtained results indicated that the social responsibility in organizations does not occur either independently in a social vacuum and to achieve the internal and external legitimacy of the organization, the social relations of organizations should be considered in normative, ethical, or cultural formats. Of course, laws, institutional pressures, societal characteristics, and economic conditions of organizations are also influential. The results of this study also showed that, unlike Western companies that seek social legitimacy in accordance with the laws, in Iranian companies, social legitimacy is affected by ethics and social norms. In addition, the current study indicated that corporate social responsibility is not a systematic behavior and it appears in critical conditions.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
Corporate Social Responsibility, External Legitimacy, Internal Legitimacy, Institutions, Institutional Analysis and Development
مراجع
حقیقی، محمد؛ آقازاده، هاشم؛ خداداد حسینی، سید حمید؛ غریبی، معین (1398). تبیین ابعاد هوشمندی رقابتی با بهـره‌گیـری از قابلیت‌های شبکه‌های اجتماعی در صنعت ماءالشعیر ایران. مدیریت بازرگانی، 11 (4)، 742-761.

رمضانی، ساناز؛ کیامهر، مهدی (1399). نقش حضور اجتماعی و نیازهای بنیادین روانشناختی در تمایل بازگشت مشتری بـه فروشگاه‌های آنلاین (نمونه‌پژوهی: اسنپ فود). مدیریت بازرگانی، 12 (3)، 548-572.

سبحانی، منوره؛ عطایی، محمد؛ معمارزاده طهران، غلامرضا؛ البرزی، محمود (1399). طراحی مدل مسئولیت اجتماعی برای سازمان‌های دولتی ایران با رویکرد اخلاقی و راهبردی. فرایند مدیریت و توسعه، 33 (4)، 3-28.

سدیدی، مجید؛ رنجبریان، بهرام؛ کاظمی، علی؛ نصر اصفهانی، علی (1399). طراحی و تحلیل الگوی تعیـین سـبک زنـدگی سازمان‌ها (نمونه‌پژوهی: شرکت‌های تولیدی لوله و اتصالات پلیمری استان اصفهان). مدیریت بازرگانی، 12 (1)، 143-160.

کریمی سارمه، زینب؛ اسماعیل‌پور، رضا؛ مباشر امینی، رمضـانعلی (1398). بررسـی تـأثیر دروغ سـبز در مسـئولیت اجتمـاعی شرکت بر قصد خرید محصول‌های سبز با میانجیگری رضایت سبز و ریسک ادراک‌شده سبز. مدیریت بازرگانی، 11 (4)، 850-868.

لوایی آدریانی، رسول؛ کلانتری، خلیل؛ اسدی، علی؛ علم‌بیگی، امیر (1398). تحلیل محتوای نظریه‌های مبتنی بر همکاری کسب‌وکارها با تأکید بر کارکردهای شبکه‌سازی. مدیریت بازرگانی. 11 (1)، 3-24.

یوسفی، محمد؛ قاضی‌زاده، مصطفی (1398). بررسی تأثیر شبکه‌های تجاری و اجتماعی بر عملکرد شرکت‌هـای کوچـک تـا متوسط در بازارهای بین‌المللی با نقش میانجی دانش بازار. مدیریت بازرگانی، 11 (4)، 869-894.

References

Ararat, M., Colpan, A. & Matten, D., 2018. Business Groups and Corporate Responsibility for the Public Good. Journal of Business Ethics, 2(1), pp. 1-19.

Axjonow, A., Ernstberger, J. & Pott, C., 2018. The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure on Corporate Reputation: A Non-professional Stakeholder Perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 151(2), pp. 429-445.

Babalola, Y., 2012. The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Firms’ Profitability in Nigeria. European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Sciences, Issue 45, pp. 1450-2275.

Bhattacharya, C. B., Korschun, D. & Sen, a. S., 2009. Strengthening Stakeholder-Company Relationships through Mutually Beneficial Corporate Social Responsibility Initiatives. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(1), pp. 257-272.

Blomquist, W., 1992. Dividing the waters: Governing groundwater in southern California. San Francisco: ICS.

Campbell, J. L., 2006. Institutional Analysis and the Paradox of Corporate Social Responsibility. American Behavioral Scientist, 49(7), p. 925–938.

Campbell, J. L., 2007. Why Would Corporations Behave in Socially Responsible Ways? An Institutional Theory of Corporate Social Responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), p. 946–967.

Carroll, A., 1991. The Pyramid of Corporate social Responsibility: Toward the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders. First Edition: Business Horizons, July- August.

Carroll, A. B., 2016. Carroll’s pyramid of CSR: taking another look. International. Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, 1(3), pp. 1-8.

Clement, F., 2010. Analyzing decentralized natural resource governance: proposition for a “politicized” institutional analysis and development framework. Policy Sciences, 43(2), pp. 129-156.

Cole, D. H., 2017. Laws, norms, and the Institutional Analysis and Development framework. Journal of Institutional Economics, 13(4), pp. 829-847.

Dahl Fitjar. R, 2011. Little big firms? Corporate social responsibility in small business that do not compete big ones. Journal of business ethics, Volume 20.

Fukuda a, K. & Ouchida, Y., 2020. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) and the environment: Does CSR increase emissions?. Energy Economics, Volume 92, pp. 1-10.

Gaikwad, P., 2017. Including Rigor and Artistry in Case Study as a Strategic Qualitative Methodology. The Qualitative Report, 22(13), pp. 3431-3446.

Garriga, E. & Dome`nec, M., 2004. Corporate Social Responsibility Theories: Mapping the Territory. Journal of Business Ethics, Volume 53, p. 51–71.

Gond, J.-P., Cabantous, L. & Krikorian, F., 2018. How do things become strategic? ‘Strategifying’ corporate social responsibility. Strategic Organization, 16(3), pp. 241-272.

Good, J., Husted, B. W., Palomares-Aguirre, I. and Garcia-de-la-torre, C. 2020. Who responds to whom and for what? A grounded theory analysis of social responsibility in the 1857 Frankfurt Bienfaisance Congress. Journal of Management History, © Emerald Publishing Limited, 1751-1348.

Haghighi, M., Aghazadeh, H., Khodadad Hosseini, S.H., & Gharibi, M. 2019. Explaining the Dimension of Competitive Intelligence through Utilizing Social Media Capabilities in Iran Non-Alcoholic Beverage Industry. Journal of Business Management, 11(4), 742-761. (in Persian)

Harjoto, M. A., 2011. Corporate governance and CSR nexus. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(1), pp. 45-67.

Harjoto, M. & Laksmana, I., 2018. The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Risk Taking and Firm Value. Journal of Business Ethics, 151(2), pp. 353-373.

Hassan, S. B. & Soliman, M., 2020. COVID-19 and repeat visitation: Assessing the role of destination social responsibility, destination reputation, holidaymakers’ trust and fear arousal. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, Volume JDMM 100495, pp. 1-33.

Heikkila, T. & Isett, K. R., 2004. Modeling Operational Decision Making in Public Organizations: An Integration of Two Institutional Theories. The American Review of Public Administration, 34(1), pp. 3-19.

Hess, C. & Ostrom, E., 2007. Understanding Knowledge as a Commons: From Theory to Practice. 1st. ed. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Hielscher , S. & Kivimaa, P., 2019. Governance through expectations: Examining the long-term policy relevance of smart meters in the United Kingdom. Futures, Volume 109, pp. 153-169.

Jackson, G. & Apostolakou, A., 2010. Corporate Social Responsibility in Western Europe: An Institutional Mirror or Substitute?. Journal of Business Ethics, Volume 94, pp. 371-394.

Johnson, B.,. R.,. C. E.,. C. T.,. S., 2010. Corporate social responsibility: The role of fortune 100 companies in domestic and international natural disasters. Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 18(6), pp. 352-369.

Karimi Sarame, Z., Esmaeilpour, R., Mobasher Amini, R. 2019. Investigating The Effect of Green wash in Corporate Social Responsibility on Purchasing Intention for Green Products: The Mediating Effects of Green Satisfaction and Green Perceived Risk. Journal of Business Management, 11(4), 850-868. (in Persian)

Kohlbacher, F., 2006. The Use of Qualitative Content Analysis in Case Study Research. Forum Qualitative Social Research, 7(1), pp. 1-24.

Kong. D, 2012. Does corporate social responsibility matter in the food industry? Evidence from a nature experiment in china. Journal of food policy, Volume 34, pp. 323-334.

Lahtinen, S., Kuusela, H. & Yrjölä, M., 2018. The company in society: when corporate responsibility transforms strategy. Journal of Business Strategy, 2(1), pp. 18-24.

Lanenburg, F., 2004. Educational Administration, Concepts and Practices. 1st. ed. Wadsworth Publishing Compaining.

Lavaei Adaryani, L., Kalantari, Kh., Asadi, A., & Alambeigi, A. 2019. Content Analysis of Business Cooperatives Theories Emphasizing Network Functions. Journal of Business Management, 11(1), 3-24. (in Persian)

Lindgreen, A., Swaen, V. & Campbell, T. T., 2010. Corporate Social Responsibility Practices in Developing and Transitional Countries: Botswana and Malawi. Journal of Business Ethics, 33(3), p. 429–440.

Lounsbury, M., 2008. Institutional rationality and practice variation: New directions in the institutional analysis of practice. Accounting, Organizations and Society, Volume 33, pp. 349-361.

Matten, D. & Moon, J., 2008. ‘‘Implicit’’ and ‘‘Explicit’’ CSR: A Conceptual Framework for a Comparative Understanding of Corporate Social Responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), p. 404–424.

McGinnis, M. D., 2011. An Introduction to IAD and the Language of the Ostrom Workshop: A Simple Guide to a Complex Framework. The Policy Studies Journal, 39(1), pp. 169-183.

Muthuri, J. N. & Gilbert, V., 2011. An Institutional Analysis of Corporate Social Responsibility in Kenya. Journal of Business Ethics, Volume 98, pp. 467-483.

Muthuri, J. N. & Gilbert, V., 2011. An Institutional Analysis of Corporate Social Responsibility in Kenya. Journal of Business Ethics, Volume 98, pp. 467-483.

Nkundabanyanga, S. K. & Okwee, A., 2011. Institutionalizing corporate social responsibility (CSR) in Uganda: does it matter?. Social Responsibility Journal, 7(4), pp. 665-680.

Nurunnabi, M., Alfakhri, Y. & Alfakhri, D., 2018. Consumer perceptions and corporate social responsibility: what we know so far. International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, 15(2), pp. 161-187.

Oakerson, R. J., 1999. Governing local public economies: Creating the civic metropolis. Oakland: CA: ICS.

Ostrom, E., 1992. Crafting institutions for self-governing irrigation systems. 1st. ed. San Francisco: Institute for Contemporary Studies Press.

Ostrom, E., 2005. Understanding Institutional Diversity. Princeton, United States of America: Princeton University Press.

Ostrom, E., 2007. A Diagnostic Approach for Going beyond Panaceas. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(39), p. 15181–15187.

Ostrom, E., Gardner, R. & Walker, J., 1994. Rules, games, and common-pool resources. 1st. ed.The University of Michigan Press. Ann Arbor.

Ostrom, V. & Ostrom, E., 1972. Legal and Political Conditions of Water Resource Development. Land Economics, 48(1), pp. 1-14.

Paul, K., Elango, B. & Kundu, S., 2020. Social responsibility skepticism: shareholder and stakeholder perspectives. Social Responsibility Journal, 16(4), pp. 521-535.

Popkovaa, E., DeLob, P. & Sergi, B. S., 2021. Corporate Social Responsibility Amid Social Distancing During the COVID-19 Crisis: BRICS vs. OECD Countries. Research in International Business and Finance, Volume 55, pp. 1-12.

Powell, W. W., 2007. The New Institutionalism. The International Encyclopedia of Organization Studies, pp. 1-11.

Powell, W. W. & DiMaggio, P. J., 1991. The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. 1st. ed. Chicago: University of Chicago.

Ramazani, S., & Kiamehr, M. 2020. The Role of Social Presence and Basic Psychological Needs in Customers’ Intention to Return to Online Stores: A Case Study of Snapfood. Journal of Business Management, 12(3), 548-572. (in Persian)

Rhodes, R. A. W., Binder, S. A. & Rockman, B. A., 2006. The Oxford Handbook of Political Institutions. 1st. ed. Oxford New York: Oxford University Press.

Rim, H., Kim, J. & Dong, C., 2019. A cross-national comparison of transparency signaling in corporate social responsibility reporting: The United States, South Korea, and China cases. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(6), pp. 1517-1529.

Robbins, S. P. & Judge, T. A., 2018. Essentials of Organizational Behavior – 1st. ed. Pearson Education Limited.

Sadidi, M., Ranjbarian, B., Kazemi, A., & Nasr Isfahani, A. 2020. Developing and Analyzing the Pattern of Determining Organizations Lifestyles: Case Study on Polymer Pipes and Fittings Production Companies in Isfahan Province. Journal of Business Management, 12(1), 143-160. (in Persian)

Schlager, E., 1990. Model specification and policy analysis: The governance of coastal fisheries. Doctoral dissertation: Indiana University, Bloomington, IN.

Schneiberg, M. & Clemens, E. S., 2006. The Typical Tools for the Job: Research Strategies in Institutional Analysis. Sociological Theory, 24(3), pp. 195-227.

Searle, J. R., 2005. What is an institution?. Journal of Institutional Economics, 1(1), pp. 1-22.

Sharma, D., 2020. Integrating Social and Educational Responsibility Concept, Model and Challenges. Innovations in Higher Education Teaching and Learning, Volume 32, pp. 25-37.

Smajgl, A., Leitch, A. & Lynam, T., 2009. Outback Institutions: An application of the Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework to four case studies in Australia’s outback, Australia: Desert Knowledge Cooperative Research Centre, Alice Springs.

Sobhani M., Ataei, M., Me’marzadehTehran, G., & Alborzi, M. 2021. A Social Responsibility Model with an Ethical-Strategic Approach for Iranian Public Organizations. Journal of Management Development Process, 33(4), 3-28. (in Persian)

Visser, W., 2008. Corporate Social Responsibility in Developing Countries. The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility (Oxford University Press, Oxford), p. 473–479.

Wei, Z., Shen, H., Zheng Zhou, K. & Juan Li, J., 2015. How Does Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility Matter in a Dysfunctional Institutional Environment? Evidence from China. Journal of Business Ethics, 140(2), p. poblished online.

Whaley, L. & Weatherhead, E. K., 2014. An integrated approach to analyzing (adaptive) co-management using the “politicized” IAD framework. Ecology and Society, 19(1).

Whaley, L. & Weatherhead, E. K., 2015. Using the politicized institutional analysis and development framework to analyze (adaptive) co-management: farming and water resources in England. Ecology and Society, 20(3).

Yen, M.-F., Shiu, Y.-M. & Wang, C.-F., 2019. Socially responsible investment returns and news: evidence from Asia. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(6), pp. 1565-1578.

Yin, J. & Zhang, Y., 2012. Institutional Dynamics and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in an Emerging Country Context: Evidence from China. Journal of Business Ethics, 111(2), p. 301–316.

Yin, R. K., 2003a. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 2nd. ed. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.

Yin, R. K., 2003b. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 3rd. ed. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.

Yousefi, M., & Ghazizadeh, M. 2019. Investigating the Effectiveness of Social and Business Networks on the Performance of Small to Medium Firms in International Markets Considering the Mediating Role of Market Knowledge. Journal of Business Management, 11(4), 869-894. (in Persian)

آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 1,006
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 611


سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب