Despite the differences throughout these scholarly articles, they are all in concurrence that corporate sustainability is paramount, and relates to a businesses responsibility to improve the prosperity of social and environmental factors, while achieving the objectives and goals of the business (Linnenluecke & Griffiths, 2010; Gladwin, Kennelly, & Krause, 1995; Bansal & Roth, 2000).
Gladwin, Kennelly and Krause (1995) emphasise the importance of corporate sustainability by portraying that the human race acts in an egocentric and material-based manner, which has led to the current unsustainable condition of the planet.
Dyllick and Hockerts (2002) convey a three-dimensional model to sustainability, identifying that economic sustainability, environmental sustainability and social sustainability are all aspects of change which must be accounted for in order to understand the short term and long term benefits of change to sustainability.
If senior management cannot understand the risks/implications of change, then they cannot extend their support. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 21(12): 1492–1502.
This revolves around the concept that there are manifold articles which suggest opposing views about a businesses approach to sustainability, how a business implements sustainability through change, and how sustainability grows as a culture throughout a business.
Essays On Innovation And Sustainability
Stoughton and Ludema (2012) claim that there are various perspectives in which sustainability, growth and change all occur, and this is consistent with the cultural perspective on change as it considers the values and beliefs of a company from the top down.
Borland (2009) asserts that the culture and implementation of sustainability is a process which begins from the influences of senior-management in a top-down approach.
Conversely, Martin (1992) expresses that the culture of change and sustainability is intrinsically embedded within fragmented groups of employees who share commonalities and values, individualistically.
These two approaches exemplify and confirm that the current literature on corporate sustainability is contradictory and inconsistent.
Drivers for Corporate Sustainability The first driver for sustainability identified for the purposes of this paper is competitiveness, and ultimately achieving competitve advantage (Bansal & Roth, 2000).