Analysing Organisational Collaboration Practices for Sustainability
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- RQ1.
- With whom do individual organisations collaborate for sustainability?
- RQ2.
- How are stakeholders affecting and being affected by sustainability efforts considered when choosing collaboration partners for sustainability?
2. Organisational Collaboration for Sustainability
3. Methods
3.1. Data Collection
3.2. Data Analysis
3.3. Limitations of the Methods
4. Results
4.1. Descriptive Statistics
4.2. Organisational Collaboration Practices for Sustainability
4.3. Organisational Sustainability Efforts, Stakeholders and the Impact on Collaboration Practices
- High in affecting and affected by sustainability efforts and high perceived importance to collaborate for sustainability: Internal stakeholders (e.g., employees and leaders/managers) and customers.
- Medium in affecting and affected by sustainability efforts and low to medium importance to collaborate for sustainability. This group is distinguished by:
- Medium affecting and affected by sustainability efforts and medium importance, including suppliers and governments;
- Medium affecting and affected by sustainability efforts and low importance, including competitors.
- Low in affecting and affected by sustainability efforts and low to medium importance. This group is distinguished by:
- Low affecting and affected by sustainability efforts and medium importance, including associations (e.g., sector organisations) and universities;
- Low affecting and affected by sustainability efforts and low importance, including foreign organisations (e.g., NGOs and other companies).
5. Discussion
5.1. Organisational Collaboration Practices for Sustainability
5.2. Organisational Sustainability Efforts, Stakeholders and The Impact on Organisational Practices
6. Conclusions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Variables | Mann-Whitney U Test |
---|---|
Number of collaboration stakeholders organisations collaborate mostly with | 0.866 |
Collaboration activities with: | |
Internal stakeholders | 0.749 |
Customers | 0.780 |
Suppliers | 0.169 |
Associations | 0.834 |
Universities | 0.138 |
Governments | 0.870 |
Foreign organisations | 0.172 |
Competitors | 0.694 |
Organisational characteristics | |
Organisational type | 0.124 |
Region/Location of headquarter | 0.083 |
Size | 0.075 |
Product-Service orientation | 0.0844 |
Respondents’ characteristics | |
Work experience within the organisation | 0.480 |
Work experience with sustainability | 0.485 |
Position in the organisation | 0.849 |
Friedman tests | Kruskal-Wallis Tests | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Collaboration Partners | Stakeholders Affecting the Organisational Sustainability Efforts | Stakeholders Affected by the Organisational Sustainability Efforts | Groups: Stakeholders Affecting Sustainability Efforts | Groups: Stakeholders Affected by Sustainability Efforts | |
Collaboration Stakeholders | |||||
Internal stakeholders | 6.04 | 6.22 | 6.06 | 0.044 * | 0.044 * |
Customers | 5.54 | 6.10 | 6.16 | ||
Suppliers | 4.77 | 4.18 | 5.09 | ||
Governments | 4.35 | 4.75 | 3.89 | ||
Competitors | 2.80 | 4.26 | 4.17 | ||
Associations | 4.63 | 3.52 | 3.67 | ||
Universities | 4.55 | 3.31 | 3.20 | ||
Foreign organisations | 3.32 | 3.65 | 3.76 |
Variables | N | Kruskal-Wallis Test | |
---|---|---|---|
Number of collaboration stakeholders organisations collaborate mostly with | Organisational type (Company, public sector organisation, civil society organisation) | 264 | 0.626 |
Number of collaboration stakeholders organisations collaborate mostly with | Product-service provision (Only product, mainly products with some services, equal amount of product and services, mainly services with some products, only services) | 268 | 0.3 |
Number of collaboration stakeholders organisations collaborate mostly with | Size (1–49, 50–249, 250–499, 500–999, 1000–4999, >5000) | 269 | 0.759 |
Items | N | Spearman Rho Correlation Coefficient |
---|---|---|
Organisation’s own sensitivity towards unsustainable activities and the perceived stakeholder sensitivity towards unsustainable activities | 259 | 0.578 ** |
Organisation’s own sensitivity towards unsustainable activities and number of collaboration partners | 265 | 0.203 ** |
Perceived stakeholder sensitivity towards unsustainable activities and number of collaboration partners | 265 | 0.146 * |
References
- Lozano, R. Proposing a definition and a framework of organisational sustainability: A review of efforts and a survey of approaches to change. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gray, B. Conditions facilitating interorganizational collaboration. Hum. Relat. 1985, 38, 911–936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gimenez, C.; Tachizawa, E.M. Extending sustainability to suppliers: A systematic literature review. Supply Chain Manag. 2012, 17, 531–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ayala-Orozco, B.; Rosell, J.A.; Merçon, J.; Bueno, I.; Alatorre-Frenk, G.; Langle-Flores, A.; Lobato, A. Challenges and strategies in place-based multi-stakeholder collaboration for sustainability: Learning from experiences in the Global South. Sustainability 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gray, B.; Purdy, J. Collaborating for Our Future: Multistakeholder Partnerships for Solving Complex Problems; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Senge, P.; Smith, B.; Kruschwitz, N.; Laur, J.; Schley, S. The Necessary Revolution: How Individuals and Organsiations are Working Together to Create a Sustainable World; Nicholas Brealey Publishing: London, UK, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Blackmar, J.M.; Getha-Taylor, H.; Moen, J.R.; Pierce, J.C. Exploring the relationship between sustainability and collaboration: Evidence from All-America city applications. Natl. Civ. Rev. 2018, 107, 52–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fawcett, S.E.; Faawcett, A.M.; Brockhaus, S.; Knemeyer, A.M. The collaboration journey. Supply Chain Manag. Rev. 2016, 20–28. [Google Scholar]
- Lozano, R. Developing collaborative and sustainable organisations. J. Clean. Prod. 2008, 16, 499–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lozano, R. Addressing stakeholders and better contributing to sustainability through game theory. J. Corproate Citizsh. 2011, 43, 44–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Freudenreich, B.; Lüdeke-Freund, F.; Schaltegger, S. A Stakeholder theory perspective on business models: Value creation for sustainability. J. Bus. Ethics 2019, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodrigue, M.; Magnan, M.; Boulianne, E. Stakeholders’ influence on environmental strategy and performance indicators: A managerial perspective. Manag. Acc. Res. 2013, 24, 301–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pondeville, S.; Swaen, V.; De Rongé, Y. Environmental management control systems: The role of contextual and strategic factors. Manag. Acc. Res. 2013, 24, 317–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gomez-Conde, J.; Lunkes, R.J.; Rosa, F.S. Environmental innovation practices and operational performance: The joint effects of management accounting and control systems and environmental training. Account. Audit. Acc. J. 2019, 32, 1325–1357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Concha, M. Exploring collaboration, its antecedents, and perceived outcomes in service partnerships of community-based organizations in South Florida. Int. J. Public Adm. 2014, 37, 44–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thomson, A.M.; Perry, J.L. Collaboration processes: Inside the black box. Public Adm. Rev. 2006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, B. Antecedents or processes? Determinants of perceived effectiveness of interorganizational collaborations for public service delivery. Int. Public Manag. J. 2010, 13, 381–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vachon, S.; Klassen, R.D. Environmental management and manufacturing performance: The role of collaboration in the supply chain. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2008, 111, 299–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meixell, M.J.; Luoma, P. Stakeholder pressure in sustainable supply chain management: A systematic review. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 2015, 45, 69–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bryson, J.M.; Crosby, B.C.; Stone, M.M. Designing and implementing cross-sector collaborations: Needed and challenging. Public Adm. Rev. 2015, 75, 647–663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seitanidi, M.M.; Crane, A. Implementing CSR through partnerships: Understanding the selection, design and institutionalisation of nonprofit-business partnerships. J. Bus. Ethics 2009, 85, 413–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Tulder, R.; Seitanidi, M.M.; Crane, A.; Brammer, S. Enhancing the impact of cross-sector partnerships: Four impact loops for channeling partnership studies. J. Bus. Ethics 2016, 135, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaku, R. The path of kyosei. Harv. Bus. Rev. 1997, 75, 55–64. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Cao, M.; Zhang, Q. Supply chain collaboration: Impact on collaborative advantage and firm performance. J. Oper. Manag. 2011, 29, 163–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fadeeva, Z. Promise of sustainability collaboration—Potential fulfilled? J. Clean. Prod. 2005, 13, 165–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lozano, R. Collaboration as a pathway for sustainability. Sustain. Dev. 2007, 381, 370–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Murray, A.; Haynes, K.; Hudson, L.J. Collaborating to achieve corporate social responsibility and sustainability? Possibilities and problems. Sustain. Account. Manag. Policy J. 2010, 1, 161–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Foley, R.W.; Wiek, A.; Kay, B.; Rushforth, R. Ideal and reality of multi-stakeholder collaboration on sustainability problems: A case study on a large-scale industrial contamination in Phoenix, Arizona. Sustain. Sci. 2017, 12, 123–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grekova, K.; Calantone, R.J.; Bremmers, H.J.; Trienekens, J.H.; Omta, S.W.F. How environmental collaboration with suppliers and customers influences firm performance: Evidence from Dutch food and beverage processors. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 112, 1861–1871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, L.; Zhao, X.; Tang, O.; Price, L.; Zhang, S.; Zhu, W. Supply chain collaboration for sustainability: A literature review and future research agenda. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2017, 194, 73–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thomson, A.M.; Perry, J.L.; Miller, T.K. Linking collaboration processes and outcomes foundations for advancing empirical theory. In Big Ideas in Collaborative Public Management; Blomgren Bingham, L., O’Leary, R., Eds.; Rout: New York, NY, USA, 2014; pp. 97–120. [Google Scholar]
- Ashby, A.; Leat, M.; Hudson-Smith, M. Making connections: A review of supply chain management and sustainability literature. Supply Chain Manag. 2012, 17, 497–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Holliday, C.O.; Schmidheiny, S.; Watts, P. Walking the Talk: The Business Case for Sustainable Development; Greenleaf Publishing: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Lisi, I.E. Translating environmental motivations into performance: The role of environmental performance measurement systems. Manag. Acc. Res. 2015, 29, 27–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Correa-Ruiz, C. Organisational dynamics of environmental/sustainability reporting: A case for structure and agency of collective actors. Span. J. Finance Account. 2019, 48, 406–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lozano, R. Orchestrating organisational change for corporate sustainability. Strategies to Overcome Resistance to Change and to Facilitate Institutionalization. Ph.D. Thesis, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Freeman, R.E. Managing for stakeholders: Trade-offs or value creation. J. Bus. Ethics 2010, 96, 7–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morsing, M.; Schultz, M. Corporate social responsibility communication: Stakeholder information, response and involvement strategies. SSRN 2006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gray, B. Collaborating: Finding Common Ground for Multiparty Problems; Jossey Bass: San Francisco, CA, USA, 1989. [Google Scholar]
- Quarshie, A.M.; Salmi, A.; Leuschner, R. Sustainability and corporate social responsibility in supply chains: The state of research in supply chain management and business ethics journals. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 2016, 22, 82–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Q.; Cao, M. Exploring antecedents of supply chain collaboration: Effects of culture and interorganizational system appropriation. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2018, 195, 146–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, I.L.; Chiu, M.L. Examining supply chain collaboration with determinants and performance impact: Social capital, justice, and technology use perspectives. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2018, 39, 5–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fawcett, S.E.; Magnan, G.M.; McCarter, M.W. A three-stage implementation model for supply chain collaboration. J. Bus. Logist. 2008, 29, 93–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Min, S.; Roath, A.S.; Daugherty, P.J.; Genchev, S.E.; Chen, H.; Arndt, A.D.; Glenn Richey, R. Supply chain collaboration: What’s happening? Int. J. Logist. Manag. 2005, 16, 237–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Hoof, B.; Thiell, M. Collaboration capacity for sustainable supply chain management: Small and medium-sized enterprises in Mexico. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 67, 239–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Austin, J.E. Strategic collaboration between nonprofits and businesses. Nonprofit Volunt. Sect. Q. 2000, 29, 69–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Savage, G.T.; Bunn, M.D.; Gray, B.; Xiao, Q.; Wang, S.; Wilson, E.J.; Williams, E.S. Stakeholder Collaboration: Implications for stakeholder theory and practice. J. Bus. Ethics 2010, 96, 21–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sharma, A.; Kearins, K. Interorganizational collaboration for regional sustainability: What happens when organizational representatives come together? J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 2011, 47, 168–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dania, W.A.P.; Xing, K.; Amer, Y. Collaboration behavioural factors for sustainable agri-food supply chains: A systematic review. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 186, 851–864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dahan, N.M.; Doh, J.P.; Oetzel, J.; Yaziji, M. Corporate-NGO collaboration: Co-creating new business models for developing markets. Long Range Plann. 2010, 43, 326–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jamali, D.; Keshishian, T. Uneasy alliances: Lessons learned from partnerships between businesses and ngos in the context of CSR. J. Bus. Ethics 2009, 84, 277–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Huijstee, M.M.; Francken, M.; Leroy, P. Partnerships for sustainable development: A review of current literature. Environ. Sci. 2007, 4, 75–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seitanidi, M.M.; Koufopoulos, D.N.; Palmer, P. Partnership formation for change: Indicators for transformative potential in cross sector social partnerships. J. Bus. Ethics 2010, 94, 139–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seitanidi, M.M. Adaptive responsibilitues: Nonlinear interactions in cross sector social partnerships. Emerg. Complex. Organ. 2008, 10, 51–64. [Google Scholar]
- Powell, W.W.; Koput, K.W.; Smith-Doerr, L. Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of Innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Adm. Sci. Q. 1996, 41, 116–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hartman, C.L.; Hofman, P.S.; Stafford, E.R. Partnerships: A path to sustainability. Bus. Strat. Environ. 1999, 8, 255–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soosay, C.A.; Hyland, P.W.; Ferrer, M. Supply chain collaboration: Capabilities for continuous innovation. Supply Chain Manag. 2008, 13, 160–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kiron, D.; Kruschwitz, N.; Haanaes, K.; Reeves, M.; Fuisz-Kehrbach, S.-K.; Kell, G. Joining Forces: Collaboration and Leadership for Sustainability. Available online: https://sloanreview.mit.edu/projects/joining-forces/#chapter-1 (accessed on 2 October 2019).
- Niesten, E.; Jolink, A.; Lopes de Sousa Jabbour, A.B.; Chappin, M.; Lozano, R. Sustainable collaboration: The impact of governance and institutions on sustainable performance. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 155, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dania, W.A.P.; Xing, K.; Amer, Y. Collaboration and sustainable agri-food supply chain: A literature review. In Proceedings of the MATEC Web of Conferences, Shanghai, China, 23 May 2016; Volume 58. [Google Scholar]
- Kumar, G.; Banerjee, R.N.; Meena, P.L.; Ganguly, K.K. Joint planning and problem solving roles in supply chain collaboration. IIMB Manag. Rev. 2017, 29, 45–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barratt, M. Understanding the meaning of collaboration in the supply chain. Supply Chain Manag. 2004, 9, 30–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosenberg, A.; Hartwig, K.; Merson, M. Government-NGO collaboration and sustainability of orphans and vulnerable children projects in southern Africa. Eval. Program Plann. 2008, 31, 51–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McDonald, S.; Young, S. Cross-sector collaboration shaping corporate social responsibility best practice within the mining industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2012, 37, 54–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koontz, T.M. Collaboration for sustainability? A framework for analyzing government impacts in collaborative-environmental management. Sustain. Sci. Pract. Policy 2006, 2, 15–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Preuss, L. Addressing sustainable development through public procurement: The case of local government. Supply Chain Manag. Int. J. 2009, 14, 213–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, L. Business-community partnerships: Understanding the nature of partnership. Corp. Gov. 2011, 11, 29–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peloza, J.; Falkenberg, L. The role of collaboration in achieving corporate social responsibility objectives. Calif. Manag. Rev. 2009, 51, 95–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vestergaard, A.; Murphy, L.; Morsing, M.; Langevang, T. Cross-sector partnerships as capitalism’s new development agents: Reconceiving impact as empowerment. Bus. Soc. 2019, 1–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Caniglia, G.; Luederitz, C.; Groß, M.; Muhr, M.; John, B.; Withycombe Keeler, L.; von Wehrden, H.; Laubichler, M.; Wiek, A.; Lang, D. Transnational collaboration for sustainability in higher education: Lessons from a systematic review. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 168, 764–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yarime, M.; Takeda, Y.; Kajikawa, Y. Towards institutional analysis of sustainability science: A quantitative examination of the patterns of research collaboration. Sustain. Sci. 2010, 5, 115–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elbakidze, M.; Angelstam, P.K.; Sandström, C.; Axelsson, R. Multi-stakeholder collaboration in Russian and Swedish model forest initiatives: Adaptive governance toward sustainable forest management? Ecol. Soc. 2010, 15, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bäckstrand, K. Multi-stakeholder partnerships for sustainable development: Rethinking legitimacy, accountability and effectiveness. Eur. Environ. 2006, 16, 290–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Airike, P.-E.; Rotter, J.P.; Mark-Herebet, C. Corporate motives for multi-stakeholder collaboration—Corporate social responsbility in the electronics supply chains. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 131, 639–648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miles, S. Stakeholder: Essentially contested or just confused? J. Bus. Ethics 2012, 108, 285–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Olander, S. Stakeholder impact analysis in construction project management. Constr. Manag. Econ. 2007, 25, 277–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hearn, S.; Buffardi, A.L. Methods Lab: What is ‘impact’? London, ODI: London, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Findler, F. Scoping what matters: An introduction to impact mapping. In Business and the Sustainable Development Goals. Measuring and Managing Corporate Impacts; Schönherr, N., Martinuzzi, A., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Strozzilaan, B. Item 08—Recommended Revisions to the GRI Reporting Principles and Related Concepts; Paper B; GSSB: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Mendelow, A.L. Environmental scanning—The impact of the Stakeholder concept. Int. Conf. Inf. Syst. 1981, 413–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mitchell, R.K.; Agle, B.R.; Wood, D.J. Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1997, 22, 853–886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roloff, J. Learning from multi-stakeholder networks: Issue-focussed stakeholder management. J. Bus. Ethics 2008, 82, 233–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bradbury-Huang, H. Sustainability by collaboration. Seer Case. Organ. Dyn. 2010, 39, 335–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) G4 Sector Disclosures. Available online: https://www.globalreporting.org/information/sector-guidance/Pages/default.aspx (accessed on 15 November 2018).
- Ceulemans, K.; Molderez, I.; van Liedekerke, L. Sustainability reporting in higher education: A comprehensive review of the recent literature and paths for further research. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 106, 127–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Domingues, A.R.; Lozano, R.; Ceulemans, K.; Ramos, T.B. Sustainability reporting in public sector organisations: Exploring the relation between the reporting process and organisational change management for sustainability. J. Environ. Manag. 2017, 192, 292–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lozano, R. Sustainability inter-linkages in reporting vindicated: A study of European companies. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 51, 57–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maas, K.; Schaltegger, S.; Crutzen, N. Integrating corporate sustainability assessment, management accounting, control, and reporting. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 136, 237–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Siebenhüner, B.; Arnold, M. Organizational learning to manage sustainable development. Bus. Strat. Environ. 2007, 16, 339–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qualtrics Online Survey Tool. Available online: http://www.qualtrics.com2018 (accessed on 1 March 2020).
- Abernethy, M.A.; Bouwens, J.; Kroos, P. Organization identity and earnings manipulation. Account. Organ. Soc. 2017, 58, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van der Stede, W.A.; Young, S.M.; Chen, C.X. Assessing the quality of evidence in empirical management accounting research: The case of survey studies. Account. Organ. Soc. 2005, 30, 655–684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Linder, J.R.; Murphy, T.H.; Briers, G.E. Handling nonresponse in social science research. J. Agric. Educ. 2001, 42, 43–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- SPSS software. Available online: http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg24041224 (accessed on 5 December 2018).
- Kolk, A. Trends in sustainability reporting by the fortune global 250. Bus. Strat. Environ. 2003, 291, 279–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Evans, J.R.; Mathur, A. The value of online surveys. Internet Res. 2005, 15, 195–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bhattacherjee, A. Social Science Research: Principles, Methods, and Practices, 2nd ed.; University of South Florida: Florida, MA, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
Position of Respondents | N | Percent (%) |
---|---|---|
Related to the organisational sustainability practices | 154 | 56.8% |
Related to management and organisational issues | 42 | 15.5% |
Related to education and research | 26 | 9.6% |
Other | 25 | 9.2% |
No information | 24 | 8.9% |
Organisations engagement with sustainability issues | ||
<1 year | 2 | 0.7% |
Between 1 and 3 years | 14 | 5.2% |
Between 3 and 5 years | 29 | 10.7% |
Between 5 and 10 years | 75 | 27.7% |
Between 10 and 15 years | 61 | 22.5% |
>15 years | 90 | 33.2% |
Organisational Type | N | Percent (%) |
---|---|---|
Company | 181 | 66.8 |
Public sector organisation | 42 | 15.5 |
Civil society organisation | 41 | 15.1 |
No information | 7 | 2.6 |
Product-service provision | ||
Only Products | 31 | 11.4% |
Mainly products with some services | 55 | 20.3% |
Equal amount of products and services | 26 | 9.6% |
Mainly services with some products | 55 | 20.3% |
Only Services | 101 | 37.3% |
No information | 3 | 1.1% |
Size (number of employees) | ||
1–49 | 50 | 18.5 |
50–249 | 24 | 8.9 |
250–499 | 18 | 6.6 |
500–999 | 15 | 5.5 |
1000–4999 | 71 | 26.2 |
> 5000 | 91 | 33.6 |
No information | 2 | 0.7 |
Country of origin | ||
EU countries | 222 | 81.9 |
Non-EU countries | 42 | 15.5 |
No information | 7 | 2.6 |
© 2020 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Fobbe, L. Analysing Organisational Collaboration Practices for Sustainability. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2466. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062466
Fobbe L. Analysing Organisational Collaboration Practices for Sustainability. Sustainability. 2020; 12(6):2466. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062466
Chicago/Turabian StyleFobbe, Lea. 2020. "Analysing Organisational Collaboration Practices for Sustainability" Sustainability 12, no. 6: 2466. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062466
APA StyleFobbe, L. (2020). Analysing Organisational Collaboration Practices for Sustainability. Sustainability, 12(6), 2466. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062466