(19) Dat komt ook doordat ik door schade en schande… ik heb in heel wat bedrijven gezeten en
Bijlage 11: Formule voor blijvend duurzaam gedrag
Het model van Bamberg & Möser stelt dat duurzaam gedrag een functie is van (het verslag van) rationele keuzes voor ‘eigen belang’ (zelfversterking) in verhouding tot (het verslag van) normatieve afwegingen (in het belang van anderen en de samenleving: zelfoverstijging). Dit kan worden weergegeven met de formule f:(DG) ->R/N. Vooralsnog lijkt voor strategisch ingestoken blijvend duurzaam gedrag de formule uitgebreid te moeten worden f: (BDG) -> R(N) + C. Blijvend duurzaam gedrag (BDG) is een functie van (het verslag van) een rationele keuze voor zelfversterking (R) in de vorm van een ‘goed gevoel’, veroorzaakt door een (zelfbenoemde) maatschappelijk betrokken (N) bedrijfsvoering. Dankzij het persoonlijke vermogen (C van competentie) van de ondernemer, kan hij dit vertalen in gedrag, in een commerciële strategie
De formule geeft een belangrijkere plaats aan het persoonlijke vermogen (de competentie) van de ondernemer om de keuze voor duurzaamheid te vertalen in gedrag, dan het model van Bamberg & Möser doet. Voorts is er een scheiding te zien tussen de ondernemer die dit gedrag sterk vanuit de bedrijfsvoering invult met bijvoorbeeld kostenbesparende en reputatieversterkende maatregelen (commerciële strategie: winstgevendheid/profitability) en de ondernemer die vanuit persoonlijk engagement maatregelen neemt (commerciële strategie: duurzaamheid/sustainability). Die laatste investeert dan meer in samenwerking en neemt initiatieven om anderen in zijn engagement te betrekken. Gevolg is ook dat deze laatste in de verduurzaming van de bedrijfsvoering verder gaat dan de ondernemer die sterk vanuit de bedrijfsvoering denkt en dat daardoor de kans op een impact voor de samenleving groter is. In de formule kan dit gedrag van de ondernemer in termen van bedrijfsvoering worden weergegeven door f: (BDG) -> R(N) + C(S). Blijvend duurzaam gedrag is een functie van een rationele keuze voor zelfversterking, gevoed door het streven naar een goed gevoel over een maatschappelijk betrokken bedrijfsvoering. De koppeling van deze keuze aan gedrag is gefaciliteerd door de persoonlijke vermogens van de ondernemer om de keuze te vertalen in een commerciële strategie gericht op duurzaamheid.
178
SUMMARY
Although sustainable development is high on every company’s agenda, supranational organisations keep on communicating their concern about the actual progress made. The assumption is that the societal and environmental challenges grow stronger and faster than the increase of knowledge and expertise on implementing sustainable business. Moreover, although there are many sustainable initiatives - in government, civil society and companies – it seems that these initiatives don’t scale up sufficiently. The question raised in this thesis is what small and medium sizes enterprises (SMEs) can be expected to contribute to sustainable development. The research is specifically aimed at gaining insight in the context and dynamics of sustainable business behavior in SMEs.
Because the playing field of sustainable development is a broad one, this study begins with a definition. Research on sustainability and business must take into account the diversity of the construct of sustainable business: ranging from a narrow (in terms of environmentally friendly, energy-conscious, socially committed business) to a broad interpretation (in terms of socially and environmentally responsible business) and ranging from activities focused on operational efficiency to strategic long term choices. Businesses are broadly divided into two groups: large multinational companies and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). This study focuses on SMEs in the Netherlands. There are three reasons for this choice: a. large companies present themselves explicitly as carriers of sustainable development. SMEs take a much less identifiable position. So it is important to have insight in the motivation and capacity within SMEs to contribute to the acceleration of sustainable development. b. SMEs are an important engine of the Dutch economy and can therefore also be an important engine for sustainable development. Therefore we need to know the ability of SMEs to scale up sustainability initiatives. c . A company does not act , there are always people involved. In SMEs, the director/shareholder directly influences the direction of the company and therefore the choice for sustainability. Insight is needed in the motivation and knowledge of the director/shareholder in this development. This leads to the following research questions:
1. What meaning does the SME entrepreneur give to sustainability and sustainable development and how does he perceive the future importance of sustainability?
2. What is the motivation of the SME entrepreneur to choose for sustainability and how does that motivation show in sustainable behavior?
179
3. Is there explicit influence of stakeholders on the personal moral standards and the motivation for sustainable business of the entrepreneur?
4. Is current research giving a reliable picture of the actual efforts in and indications for the degree of sustainability (for instance in the measurements of EIM 2011)?
It is striking that most research on questions like this uses questionnaires and econometric analysis in which the conceptual framework is given in advance. This raises the question whether that conceptual framework is in line with the mental framework of the respondents: what meaning do they give to the terms used in questionnaires and how does this affect the answers given?
To understand the context and dynamics of sustainable business behavior in SMEs, it is important to have insight in the foundations of the behavior of the individual SME-owner and the overlap and differences in the interpretations of this behavior. A qualitative approach with features of a narrative method is used to grasp the contextual meaning of the concepts of sustainability and sustainable development. The aim of the approach is to arrive at a model that provides insight into the patterns that SME-owners observe in their context , how that insight leads to values and motivations and how these values and motivations may or may not lead to lasting behavioral intention and sustainable behavior. 22 Interviews were held with SME-owners from three different industries. By using the principles of grounded theory the interviews were aimed at deriving the variety of views directly from the individuals themselves.
The results show that the interpretation of the construct of sustainability has a strong market-orientation. SME-owners do not feel any pressure from external parties to act sustainably: government and industry associations keep their distance and competitors, consumers and investors focus primarily on price and performance. SME-owners are said to be motivated by two major motives: stand up for their own interests and stick to what is legally required. The research indeed shows that there is no pressure from external parties and that factors such as mindset and personal commitment of the entrepreneur are far more important.
There is a strong correlation found between the perception and the actual level of sustainable business behavior. The motivation to invest in sustainability correlates strongest (almost 50%) with the personal estimation of the future importance of sustainability for the company. Values and sustainable behavior correlate significantly but on a much lower level; no influence of significant others and critical incidents on sustainable behavior has been found. This seems to confirm that a rational variable – estimation of future importance of sustainability for the company – is the best predictor of sustainable business behavior. Values might be presented as main triggers in
180
interviews, public presentations and surveys, but they were not that dominant in the exploratory research of this study.
The meaning of sustainability is strongly influenced by the context of the entrepreneur. When the company’s main activities are perceived as key competencies, this effect is even stronger. The result is that the construct ‘sustainability’ doesn’t get any specific meaning apart from these activities and due to the coupling with the own activities usually gets a narrow operational meaning closely related to aspects of ‘green’ and efficiency (less energy use, less CO2 emissions, less waste). There is a link between this narrow definition of sustainability and the short term profitability of the company. The dialogue of the SME-owner between the role of entrepreneur and civilian shows forms of cognitive dissonance in the business choices made. There is a trade–off between feelings of responsibility for the company and for society. This trade-off is visible in the motivation of the SME-owner of how he wants to feed his self-enhancement: he strives at doing business with a balance between ratio (choices that feed the short term profitability) and emotion (choices that show respect to others). The self-enhancement is not aimed at power, but at creating a feeling of relevance and influence. There is not one entrepreneur that says to aim at maximalisation of profit. The ax self-enhancement and self-transcedence that has been validated in earlier research of Stern proves to have limited use in this exploratory research. The translation of self-enhancement drivers into a strategic commercial business policy depends on the competencies of the entrepreneur. Strategic sustainable business behavior is a function of a choice for self enhancement, fed by the aim to feel good about one’s sustainable behavior. The translation to behavior is facilitated by the personal competencies of the entrepreneur to choose a strategic sustainable business policy. In order to reach sustainable development two seemingly opposed tracks are important:
- A long term business policy aimed at profitability in which sustainability is a means to reach this.
- A long term business policy aimed at sustainability in which sustainability is seen as a goal in itself with profitability as a means to reach it.
The expectation is that a choice for a sustainability business policy will add more to upscaling due to the ambassadorship activities of the SME-owner. The results of the study provide cues for educational and governmental institutions to enhance the motivation and competencies of (future) entrepreneurs to step into sustainable business behavior.
181
LITERATUURLIJST
Agle, B.R. & C.B. Caldwell (1999): Understanding research on values in business: a level
of analysis framework. Business and Society 38, (3): 326-387.
Ajzen, I. (1991): The theory of planned behavior. Organisational behavior and human decision processes 50 (2), 1-63.
Ajzen, I. & M. Fishbein (1980): Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Ajzen, I. & M. Fishbein (2005): The influence of attitudes on behavior. In: The handbook of attitudes, Albaracin, D. e.a. 2005. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey. Anderson, A.R. & L. Warren (2011): The entrepreneur as hero and jester: Enacting the
entrepreneurial discourse. International Small Business Journal 29 (6): 589-609.
Badaracco, Joseph (1998): Onmogelijke keuzes. Managers en hun morele dilemma’s. Thema Uitgeverij, Zaltbommel.
Baidenmann, Jolein (2007): Duurzaamheidsbeleving door innovatieve, duurzame
mkb’ers. Een wereld van verschil.
Bakel, Janneke van, Derk Loorbach, Gail Whiteman & Jan Rothmans (2007): Business
strategies for transitions towards sustainable systems. ERS 2007 094 ORG.
Bamberg, Sebastian & G. Möser (2007): Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and
Tomera: a new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology 27 (2007) 14-25.
Barrett, Richard (1998): Liberating the corporate soul; building a visionary
182
Beck, Don Edward & C.C. Cowan (1996): Spiral Dynamics. Waarden, leiderschap en
veranderingen in een dynamisch model.
Berger, Peter & Thomas Luckmann (1991): The social construction of reality: a treatise
in the sociology of knowledge. Penguin Books, New York.
Berkhout, G. (2002): Van poldermodel naar innovatiebeleid. In: Het Nederlandse
innovatiebeleid, tijd voor vernieuwing? Ministerie van EZ, 2002/19.
Bertens, C.A.W.& Hoevenagel R. (2002): Naar een systematische meting van
duurzaamheidsprestaties van het MKB. EIM.
Bertens, Coen, M. Pasaribu, M. Gombault & K. Kossen (2008): Duurzaam ondernemen
in het MKB: kansen grijpen! EIM Beleidscafé 20 november 2008.
Bertens, Coen, C. van Essen, M. Gombault & M. Willems (2009): Economische
tegenwind van invloed op duurzaam ondernemen in het MKB? EIM, juli 2009.
Bertens, C., Veldhuis-Van Essen, C., Snoei, J. (2011): MVO-ambities in het MKB. Eim Panteia en MVO Nederland.
Blake, J. (1999): Overcoming the ‘value-action gap’ in environmental policy: tensions
between national policy and local experience. Local Environment, 4(3), pp. 275-278.
Bos-Brouwers, Hilke (2010): Sustainable innovation processes within small and
medium-sized Enterprises. Academisch proefschrift Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Bowen, Glenn A. (2006): Grounded theory and sensitizing concepts. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 2006, 5 (3), pp. 12-23.
Bower, M. (2003): Company philosophy: The way we do things around here. The McKinsey Quarterly, 2, 110-117.
183
Braungart, M. & W. McDonough (2000): A world of abundance, in: Interfaces, vol. 30:3, pp. 55-65, 2000.
Braungart, Michael (2007): Cradle to cradle, afval = voedsel. Scriptum. Brockhaus, R. (1980): Risk taking propensity of entrepreneurs. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 23 (3), pp. 509-520.
Bryson, John R. & Rachel Lombardi (2009): Balancing product and process
sustainability against business profitability : sustainability as a competitive strategy in the property development process. Business strategy and the environment, 18, 97-107.
Carroll, Archie B. (1999): Corporate Social Responsibility: Evolution of a Definitional
Construct. Business Society, 38-168.
Chell, Elizabeth (2000): Towards researching the “opportunistic entrepreneur”: a social
constructionist approach and research agenda. In: European Journal of Work and
Organizational Psychology, 9.
Chell, Elizabeth (2007): Social Enterprise and Entrepreneurship. Towards a Convergent
Theory of the Entrepreneurial Process. International Small Business Journal 25 (1),
5-26.
Chisholm, Rupert (1998): Developing network organisations. Learning from practise
and theory. Addison-Wesley.
Cilliers, P. (1998): Complexity and post-modernism. Understanding complex systems. London/New York, Routledge.
Clarke, Jean & Robin Holt (2010): The mature entrepreneur: a narrative approach to
entrepreneurial goals. Journal of Management Inquiry 19 (1) 69-83.
Clerq De, Dirk & Maxim Voronov (2011): Sustainability in entrepreneurship. A tale of
184
Consumers International (2007): report of the council for the year 2007. London, UK. Corbin J.M. & A.C. Strauss (2008): Basics of qualitative research. Techniques and
procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage Publications.
Cramer, J. (2002): Ondernemen met hoofd en hart; duurzaam ondernemen:
praktijkervaringen. Koninklijke Van Gorcum.
Dankbaar, Ben (2008): Nieuwe maakbaarheid. Doelgericht veranderen in bedrijf en
samenleving in de 21ste eeuw. Kluwer.
Darnton, Andrew, Jake Elster-Jones, Karen Lucas & Mike Brooks (2006): Promoting
pro-environmental behaviour: existing evidence to inform better policy making. A study for the Department for environment, food and rural affairs. The Centre for Sustainable
Development University of Westminster.
Dean, T.J., McMullen, J.S. (2007).: Toward a theory of sustainable entrepreneurship:
reducing environmental degradation through entrepreneurial action. Journal of
Business Venturing 22, 50-76.
De Groot, J. & L. Steg (2007): General beliefs and the Theory of Planned Behaviour: the
role of environmental concerns in the TPB. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 2007,
37, 8, p. 1817-1836.
Deloitte Branchegroep Retail (2012): Bedrijfsvergelijking Levensmiddelendetailhandel. Delnooz, P.V.A. (1996): Onderzoekspraktijken; Boom Onderwijs, Amsterdam.
Delnooz, Paul (2008): Onderwijs, onderzoek en de kunst van het creatieve denken. Boom Onderwijs, Amsterdam.
185
Dijk, E. van & M. Zeelenberg (2009): De (ir)rationaliteit van de beslisser. Published in De menselijke beslisser: Over de psychologie van keuze en gedrag, No. 22, p.25-46. Amsterdam University Press.
DiMaggio, P.J. & W.W. Powell (1983): The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism
and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review 48:
147-160.
Dogterom, Tom (2010): Corporate responsibility in de boardroom. Inspirerende
verhalen van koplopers. Atos Consulting Utrecht.
Dossier Duurzaam (2008, 2010, 2011, 2013). DDB, Intomart GfK en b-open, Amsterdam.
Dunphy, Dexter, Andrew Griffiths & Suzanne Benn (2003): Organizational change for
corporate sustainability. A guide for leaders and change agents of the future. Routledge,
London/New York.
Duurzaamheidskompas (2010, 2013): MarketRespons & Schuttelaar en partners, Den Haag.
Dyllick, Thomas & Kai Hockerts (2002): Beyond the business case for corporate
sustainability. Business Strategy and the environment, 11, 130-141.
Eccles Robert G., Ioannis Ioannou, George Serafeim (2012): The Impact of a Corporate
Culture of Sustainability on Corporate Behavior and Performance. NBER Working Paper
No. 17950.
Eichler, M. (1999): Sustainability from a feminist sociological perspective: a framework
for disciplinary reorientation. In E. Becker & Th. Jahn (eds): Sustainability and the
186
EIM: zie Bertens e.a. (2008, 2011); Bertens & Hoevenagel (2002, 2004); Gibcus & Van Hoesel (2003); Hoevenagel & Uit Beierse (1999); Wennekers & Hartog (2011). Elkington, J. (1997): Cannibals with forks, the triple bottom line of 21st century business. Oxford, Capstone Publishing.
Elkington, J. (2012): The Zeronauts. Breaking the barriers of sustainability. London, Routledge.
Epstein, M.J. (2008): Duurzaam ondernemen: hoe het werkt en hoe je het kunt meten. Academic Service.
Estes, J.M. (2009): Smart green: how to implement sustainable business practises in any
industry – and make money. Barnes & Noble.
Faber, M., Thomas Petersen & Johannes Schiller (2001): Homo oeconomicus and homo
politicus in Ecological Economics. Ecological Economics 40 (2002) 323-333.
Fehr, E. & K. Schmidt (1999): A theory of fairness, competition and cooperation. Quarterly Journal of Economics 114 (3): 817-868.
Feijtel, J.A. (2007): Corporate Social Responsibility in SMEs. A specification of the factors
that influence CSR decisions. Master thesis Tilburg University, Faculty of social and
behavioural sciences.
Fishbein, M.A (1979): The theory of reasoned action: Some applications and
implications. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, Vol 27, 1979, 65-116.
Fortuijn, Eelco (2009): Kunnen we duurzaamheid van de consument verwachten? Fairfood International, Amsterdam.
Friedman H. & L. Friedman (2008): Can ‘homo spiritualis’ replace homo economicus in
the business curriculum? In: e-Journal of Business Education & Scholarship of teaching,
187
Frey, B. (1998): Not just for the money: An economic theory of personal motivation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Gaglio, C.M. (2004): The Role of Mental Simulations and Counterfactual Thinking in the
Opportunity Identification Process. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice; Volume 28,
Issue 6, pages 533–552.
Galtung J. (1977): Methodology and Ideology, theory and methods of social research (volume1); Copenhagen.
Gaspersz, J.B.R. (2009): Dagelijks innoveren: praktische adviezen voor een kansgerichte
organisatie. Amsterdam: Pearson Education Benelux.
Geus, Arie de; N.D. Stone & L.H. Vonk (1997): De levende onderneming. Over leven en
leren in een turbulente omgeving. Scriptum, Schiedam.
Ghobodian, Abby & Nicholas O’Regan (2006): the impact of ownership on small firm
behaviour and performance. International Small Business Journal 2006 24: 555-586.
Gibcus, P., van Hoesel, P. (2003): De beslissende ondernemer in het MKB; een
vooronderzoek. EIM.
Giddens, A. (1984): The constitution of society: introduction of the Theory of
structuration. Berkeley University of California Press.
Giles, M., & Cairns, E. (1995): Blood donation and Ajzen's theory of planned behaviour:
An examination of perceived behavioural control. British Journal of Social Psychology,
34, 173-188.
Glaser & Strauss (1967): The Global Fitness Framework (GFF) in Global Responsibility. The GRLI partner magazine, January 2010, page 24.
Gordon, L.W. (1996): SPW Schaal voor Persoonlijke Waarden. Nederlandse bewerking: P.J.D. Drenth & L.J. Kranendonk.
188
Gorgievski, M.J., R.G.M. Kemp & A. Faber (2006): Waarden in het MKB.
Literatuuronderzoek en ontwikkeling meetmethodiek. Milieu- en Natuurplanbureau,
Bilthoven.
Graafland, J., Kaptein, M., Klamer, H. & van Oorschot, A. (red.) (2000): Binnenkamers,
Ondernemers over hun ethische dilemma’s, drijfveren en geloof. Uitgeverij Meinema,
Zoetermeer.
Graafland, Johan, M. Kaptein & C. Mazereeuw-Van der Duijn Schouten (2007):
Conceptions of God, Normative Convictions, and Socially Responsible Business Conduct. An Explorative Study Among Executives. Business Society 46 (3) 331-368.
Graafland, Johan; Muel Kaptein, Corrie Mazereeuw (2010): Motives of socially
responsible business conduct. Center, Tilburg University.
Graafland, Johan & Corrie Mazereeuw (2012): Motives for social corporate
responsibility. De Economist (2012) 160: 377-396.
Graafland, Johan & Hugo Smid (2013): Impact measurement and performance analysis
of CSR. Center, Tilburg University.
Green Winners (2008): The performance of sustainability-focussed companies during
the financial crisis. AT Kearney.
Gulev, R.E. (2010): On the origins of sustainable behaviour: linking attitudes and values
to sustainable behaviour. Proceedings of the 11th MIC Conference, Ankara, Turkey, 24-27 November 2010.
Guth, W. D. & R. Tagiuri (1965): Personal values and corporate strategy. Harvard Business Review, September-oktober, 123-132.
Handy, Charles (1997): The hungry spirit: beyond capitalism: a quest for purpose in the
189
Hardy M. e.a. (1997): Von Glasersfeld’s radical constructivism: a critical review; Science and Education, 6 (1-2).
Hartog, Deanne den, Paul Koopman en Jaap van Muijen (1997): Inspirerend
leiderschap in organisaties.
Haskins, C. (2009): Using the concept of sustainable development to encourage
corporate responsibility in small Enterprises. Norwegian University of Science and
Technology.
Hatch, M.J. (1997): Organisation theory – modern, symbolic and postmodern
perspectives. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Have ten, Steven & Wouter ten Have (2004): Het boek verandering. Over het doordacht
werken aan de organisatie. Uitgeverij Nieuwezijds, Amsterdam.
Hemingway, C.A. (2006): Personal values as a catalyst for corporate social
entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Ethics, 60, 233-249.
Hemingway, C.A. (2002): An Exploratory Analysis of Corporate Social Responsibility:
definitions, motives and values. Research Memorandum 34 2002. Centre for
Management and Organisational Learning, Hull University Business School. Hemingway, C.A. & MacLagan, P.W. (2004): Managers’ personal values as drivers of
CSR. Journal of Business Ethics, 50, 33-44.
Hemingway, C.A. (2005): Personal Values as a Catalyst for Corporate Social
Entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Ethics (2005) 60: 233-249.
Hermans, H.J.M. (2001) The Dialogical Self: Toward a Theory of Personal and Cultural
Positioning. Culture Psychology 7 (3) 243-281.
Higgins, E.T., Friedman, R.S., Harlow, R.E., Idson, L.C., Ayduk, O.N. & Taylor, A. (2001):
Achievement orientations from subjective histories of success: promotion pride versus prevention pride. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 3-23.
190
Hillary, R. (1999): Evaluation of study reports on the barriers, opportunities and drivers