Umeå universitets logga

Research points to public-private collaboration’s importance for supporting the transformation from linear to circular business models. As little is known of such collaboration, we conducted a 4-year in-depth case study to answer how transformation is affected by two types of tensions: between linear and circular elements and between public and private partners. We find that tensions shape the transformational process into a dialectical pattern, as partners’ institutional differences initially cause them to conflict over whether to focus on linear or circular elements but, over time, arrive at a synthesis. Our findings contribute to circular business model research by illustrating the usefulness of understanding transformational challenges as linear-circular tensions and by illuminating the dialectics of transformational processes.

Sustainability issues are associated with numerous tensions. These tensions are sometimes being referred to as wicked or even paradoxical. As long as tensions stay latent for organizational members, they will not be perceived and, thus, will not be adequately managed. The question of how tensions become salient is therefore of particular interest. Prior research suggests that contextual and cognitive factors render latent tensions salient and argues that advanced cognition is required to recognize sustainability tensions. In this paper, we show that developing cognition is only one possible strategy. We argue that information links a situation with actors' cognition and is therefore vital for rendering latent sustainability tensions salient. We show that simplifying information and making information more complex are two additional ways to recognize sustainability tensions. The situation–information–cognition (SIC) rule we develop in this article shows when and under which conditions the three strategies apply interchangeably or in combination.

This study explores the intricate dynamics of immigrant family entrepreneurship, examining how immigrant family entrepreneurs navigate tensions between economic and social integration for sustainability through three longitudinal case studies of immigrant family businesses. Utilizing paradox theory, we offer a multi-dimensional perspective that captures the complexity of immigrant family businesses in Sweden. Our research enriches existing theoretical frameworks on immigrant family entrepreneurship by considering both economic and social facets in tandem. Our findings underscore the pivotal role of the family in navigating the tensions of immigrant family entrepreneurship, with family members acting both as facilitators and inhibitors. Our insights can guide policymakers and practitioners in fostering more inclusive and sustainable immigrant entrepreneurial communities in practice. This study contributes to the broader discourse on sustainability challenges in immigrant family entrepreneurship, aligning with the goals of social and economic sustainability.

Paradox theory often overlooks how (inter)organizational paradoxes interact and evolve within a processual context, both conceptually and empirically. This study delves into such 'knotting' by examining coopetition for sustainability, wherein competitors collaborate to address simultaneously economic, environmental and social concerns. We introduce a novel conceptualization of knotted paradoxes through the lens of system dynamics (SD). Within this SD framework, a knotted paradox is portrayed as a complex dynamic system characterized by contradictory cause-effect interactions forming intertwined balancing and reinforcing causality loops. This perspective facilitates a systemic understanding of the complex and dynamic nature of knotted paradoxes. We apply our conceptualization to explore an in-depth case study of how seven construction and housing firms collaborate and compete to plan a new sustainable residential area in a Swedish city. By constructing causal-loop models we examine how knotted coopetition and sustainability paradoxes exacerbate and mitigate each other, oscillating in their dominance through various processes over time. Through our analysis we distinguish three patterns of vicious cycles indicative of dysfunctional paradox evolution: Fading, Accelerating, and Mixed dynamics.

Addressing global challenges such as climate change, inequality, and resource depletion requires innovative collaborative strategies. This paper explores the concept of coopetition —simultaneous cooperation and competition among organizations — as a means to tackle these issues. We shift the focus from the commonly studied 'how much' value is created in coopetition to 'what' type of value is created. Utilizing a taxonomy of private, public, club, and common goods, we examine how different types of value influence the processes and outcomes of coopetition. Through examples in the aviation industry we illustrate how the nature of the goods produced affects the organization and effectiveness of coopetition. Our findings challenge the traditional view that synergetic value creation is necessary for successful coopetition as we propose instead that coopetition can be viable even without synergistic value. This study provides new insights into the economic underpinnings of coopetition and offers practical guidance for organizations and policymakers aiming to foster sustainable practices through innovative collaborative models.

Business schools, and universities providing business education, from across the globe have increasingly engaged in responsible management education (RME), that is in embedding social, environmental and ethical topics in their teaching and research. However, we still do not fully understand the institutional pressures that have led to the adoption of RME, in particular concerning under-researched regions like Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). Hence, we undertook what is to our knowledge the most comprehensive study into the adoption of RME in CEE to date (including 13 countries: Belarus, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovenia and Ukraine). We find that, with regard to RME, isomorphic pressures seem to shape teaching and research in different ways, which suggests that the idea of a holistic approach to RME, promoted by, for example, the Principles of Responsible Management Education (PRME), needs to be revisited; rather, different trajectories of organizational engagement may emerge for each principle. As a contribution to institutional theory, we discuss how a highly fragmented organizational field—like RME with its multiple dimensions—impacts on notions of actor centrality, where actors achieve centrality with regard to some dimensions of the field but fail to do so for others. In particular, we found that the European Union holds centrality in the area of RME teaching, but not in RME research. Our findings thus suggest that the concept of field centrality needs further clarification.

Corporate social responsibility, business ethics and sustainability – often bracketed under responsible management education (RME) – are topics that are increasingly adopted by universities and business schools across the globe. However, one region where our knowledge regarding the extent of RME is still limited is Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). Bringing together a team of scholars (currently or formerly) based throughout the region, we were able to conduct the largest survey to date of RME practices in the CEE region, covering 13 countries. Our findings suggest that, at a declarative level, RME is very much present at CEE universities and business schools, in particular in terms of teaching. However, a pro-RME rhetoric is not necessarily backed-up with substance; in particular, a lack of financial resources was identified as the major barrier to greater engagement with RME practices. We also observed a gap between commitment to RME in teaching versus in research, which could be a potential source of concern as teaching should be informed by research; otherwise faculty remain dependent on imported teaching materials. We contribute to strengthening the RME agenda in management education by discussing the implications of our findings for individual faculty, business school leaders, governments and international associations of management education.

Despite the fact that many organizations must manage frequently multiple paradoxes in their operations, extant paradox studies have under-researched the phenomenon of a knotted paradox that emerges when actors navigate in conditions of contradicting demands, which stem from several paradoxes simultaneously. In this study, we explore the knotted paradox of coopetition for sustainability, a process in which competitors cooperate to address sustainability challenges, and examine the interplay between its intensity, balance, and outcome. The findings of a quantitative study conducted among organizational actors in the housing sector demonstrate that coopetition intensity has a significant yet complex impact on sustainability outcomes. In the relationship characterized by an inverted U-shaped curve, an increase in coopetition intensity and balance leads to an increase in sustainability outcomes, but only until a specific limit, after which sustainability outcomes decrease with further intensification of coopetition. The findings indicate that coopetition balance and sustainability balance do not have a significant relationship. The study provides insights for managers on how coopetition in different conditions can contribute to corporate sustainability. The study demonstrates that coopetition and sustainability can be knotted successfully, although the intensity of competing demands and the balance between them need to be cautiously managed.

Cross-sectoral collaboration is argued to be vital for business model innovation for sustainability and the tension-filled choices it involves but brings its own complexities. We therefore investigate how institutional logics and power affect the interests and dependencies of City planners and real-estate developers involved in developing a business model for sustainable mobility. Through analyzing how partners deal with tension-filled choices regarding business model elements, we develop a model to explain how compromises are made in partnerships characterized by conflicting interests coupled to strong interdependencies. We finish by cautioning that conflicting interests and power characteristics may delimit the potential for such cross-sectoral collaborations to contribute to sustainable development in sectors where public actors are used to rely on their authority.

Despite considerable interest into circular economy, it remains undertheorized and underdeveloped. In response, this article advances circular economy by drawing on two theories to explain how firms can increase the circularity of resource use and why they are incentivized to do so. We refer to Modern Portfolio Theory to link the resource use of individual companies to the resource use of a group of firms. In doing so, we show how—and under which conditions—resource use decreases when circulated at the group level. We then refer to principles from evolutionary biology to explain why it is beneficial to structure resource flows at the group level, even when the resource-reducing effect might not materialize for individual firms. In combining both perspectives we challenge entrenched ways of “doing” circular economy: We offer an integrated theoretical approach that helps inform managers' decision-making on circular resource use in practice.