Umeå University's logo

umu.sePublications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Publications (10 of 26) Show all publications
Preuss, L., Elms, H., Kurdyukov, R., Golob, U., Zaharia, R. M., Jalsenjak, B., . . . Tomancová, L. (2023). Institutional pressures and the adoption of responsible management education at universities and business schools in Central and Eastern Europe. Business Ethics, the Environment and Responsibility, 32(4), 1575-1591
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Institutional pressures and the adoption of responsible management education at universities and business schools in Central and Eastern Europe
Show others...
2023 (English)In: Business Ethics, the Environment and Responsibility, ISSN 2694-6416, Vol. 32, no 4, p. 1575-1591Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

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.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
John Wiley & Sons, 2023
Keywords
actor centrality, business education, business schools, Central and Eastern Europe, institutional fields, responsible management education
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-212272 (URN)10.1111/beer.12566 (DOI)2-s2.0-85164468893 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2023-07-20 Created: 2023-07-20 Last updated: 2023-12-29Bibliographically approved
Preuss, L., Elms, H., Kurdyukov, R., Golob, U., Zaharia, R. M., Jalsenjak, B., . . . Tomancová, L. (2023). Taking stock of responsible management education in Central and Eastern Europe. The International Journal of Management Education, 21(3), Article ID 100889.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Taking stock of responsible management education in Central and Eastern Europe
Show others...
2023 (English)In: The International Journal of Management Education, ISSN 1472-8117, E-ISSN 2352-3565, Vol. 21, no 3, article id 100889Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

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.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2023
Keywords
Business education and training, Business schools, Central and Eastern Europe, Corporate social responsibility, Responsible management education
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-215950 (URN)10.1016/j.ijme.2023.100889 (DOI)2-s2.0-85174733469 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2023-11-01 Created: 2023-11-01 Last updated: 2023-11-01Bibliographically approved
Manzhynski, S. & Biedenbach, G. (2023). The knotted paradox of coopetition for sustainability: investigating the interplay between core paradox properties. Industrial Marketing Management, 110, 31-45
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The knotted paradox of coopetition for sustainability: investigating the interplay between core paradox properties
2023 (English)In: Industrial Marketing Management, ISSN 0019-8501, E-ISSN 1873-2062, Vol. 110, p. 31-45Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

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.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2023
Keywords
Paradox, Coopetition, Sustainability, Coopetition for sustainability, Knotted paradox
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-205601 (URN)10.1016/j.indmarman.2023.02.013 (DOI)000951448000001 ()2-s2.0-85149386500 (Scopus ID)
Funder
The Kamprad Family Foundation, 20160063The Jan Wallander and Tom Hedelius Foundation, W22-0016
Available from: 2023-03-09 Created: 2023-03-09 Last updated: 2023-09-05Bibliographically approved
Stål, H. I., Bengtsson, M. & Manzhynski, S. (2022). Cross‐sectoral collaboration in business model innovation for sustainable development: Tensions and compromises. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(1), 445-463
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Cross‐sectoral collaboration in business model innovation for sustainable development: Tensions and compromises
2022 (English)In: Business Strategy and the Environment, ISSN 0964-4733, E-ISSN 1099-0836, Vol. 31, no 1, p. 445-463Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

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.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
John Wiley & Sons, 2022
Keywords
Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law, Strategy and Management, Geography, Planning and Development, Business and International Management
National Category
Business Administration
Research subject
sustainability
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-188197 (URN)10.1002/bse.2903 (DOI)000702903600001 ()2-s2.0-85116138326 (Scopus ID)
Funder
The Kamprad Family Foundation, 20160063Swedish Research Council Formas, 2019-00520
Available from: 2021-10-05 Created: 2021-10-05 Last updated: 2023-08-17Bibliographically approved
Figge, F., Thorpe, A. S., Manzhynski, S. & Gutberlet, M. (2022). The us in reUSe: Theorizing the how and why of the circular economy. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(6), 2741-2753
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The us in reUSe: Theorizing the how and why of the circular economy
2022 (English)In: Business Strategy and the Environment, ISSN 0964-4733, E-ISSN 1099-0836, Vol. 31, no 6, p. 2741-2753Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

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.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
John Wiley & Sons, 2022
National Category
Business Administration
Research subject
sustainability
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-191954 (URN)10.1002/bse.3003 (DOI)000747552400001 ()2-s2.0-85123735720 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2022-01-28 Created: 2022-01-28 Last updated: 2022-12-14Bibliographically approved
Figge, F., Thorpe, A. S. & Manzhynski, S. (2022). Value creation and the circular economy: a tale of three externalities. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 26(5), 1690-1700
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Value creation and the circular economy: a tale of three externalities
2022 (English)In: Journal of Industrial Ecology, ISSN 1088-1980, E-ISSN 1530-9290, Vol. 26, no 5, p. 1690-1700Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

By using resources more efficiently, resource users help to overcome the inherent resource scarcity on “spaceship earth.” One strategy in this context is to close resource loops and to use resources circularly. With fewer resources wasted, a more circular use of resources should also increase the efficiency of resource use and create more value. However, when resource users aim for a greater degree of efficiency, inadvertently they might contribute to resources being used less rather than more circularly and, consequently, less instead of more efficiently. We show how to assess the value that is created by the efficient use of resources for the case of linear and circular resource use. This allows us to identify three distinct types of positive externalities related to the circular use of resources: (1) systemic static externalities; (2) idiosyncratic dynamic externalities; and (3) systemic dynamic externalities. We describe how the value created by these externalities can be assessed and argue that they need to be considered when evaluating environmental resource use.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
John Wiley & Sons, 2022
Keywords
circular circular economy, eco-efficiency, externality, industrial ecology, resource use indicator, value creation
National Category
Economics Probability Theory and Statistics
Research subject
sustainability; sustainable development
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-198475 (URN)10.1111/jiec.13300 (DOI)000834760600001 ()2-s2.0-85135276039 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2022-08-05 Created: 2022-08-05 Last updated: 2022-12-19Bibliographically approved
Figge, F., Thorpe, A. S. & Manzhynski, S. (2021). Between you and I: A portfolio theory of the circular economy. Ecological Economics, 190, Article ID 107190.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Between you and I: A portfolio theory of the circular economy
2021 (English)In: Ecological Economics, ISSN 0921-8009, E-ISSN 1873-6106, Vol. 190, article id 107190Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

By using resources more circularly, individual resources users hope to contribute to a more eco-efficient and sustainable resource use. Whether resources are used sustainably is decided at the macro-level, raising the question if, as well as how, the efficient and circular use of resources at the micro-level adds up to their efficient and circular use on the macro-level. Currently, the link between the circular use of resources at micro- and macro-levels is under-theorized. The symbiotic relationship between individual resource users enables a reduction in the resource use at the macro-level. In this conceptual paper, we argue that an analogous link exists in finance where desirable investment return is linked to undesirable investment risk, and that via the generation of efficient portfolios, individual risks are at least partially diversified away. As our main contribution, we theorize the circular economy, both in its perfect and imperfect forms, using modern portfolio theory. Our theory identifies the drivers of circular resource use and shows under which conditions individual resource use contributes to the circular use of resources.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2021
Keywords
Circular economy, Eco-efficiency, Portfolio theory
National Category
Economics and Business
Research subject
sustainability
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-186864 (URN)10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107190 (DOI)000696730300024 ()2-s2.0-85112810765 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2021-08-24 Created: 2021-08-24 Last updated: 2023-09-05Bibliographically approved
Manzhynski, S. (2021). Understanding and managing coopetition for sustainability: process and outcomes. (Doctoral dissertation). Umeå: Umeå University
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Understanding and managing coopetition for sustainability: process and outcomes
2021 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Alternative title[sv]
Att förstå och hantera coopetition för hållbarhet : process och utfall
Abstract [en]

Scholars highlight the potential gains of collaboration between competitors for supporting sustainability but there is a lack of both theoretical and empirical studies. In this thesis I aim to enhance the understanding of 'coopetition forsustainability', which I define as 'an inter-firm phenomenon where actors fromthe same industry simultaneously cooperate and compete with the intent to achieve environmental, economic, and social benefits'. By investigating the process and outcomes of coopetition for sustainability I develop several analytical tools for the systematic exploration of the coopetitive interaction for reaching sustainability goals and show that coopetition for sustainability raises numerous knotted paradoxical tensions. I further reveal organizing and regulating mechanisms that actors use to address these tensions, and which can motivate greater extents of sustainability in terms of outcomes.

This thesis consists of six appended papers (two conceptual, two qualitative, and two quantitative) that explore coopetition for sustainability in three contextual settings (Swedish, Polish, and Belarusian housing). Collectively, the papers span several theoretical frameworks (paradox theory, sustainable value, modern portfolio theory) and methodological approaches (systemdynamics, in-depth case study, survey questionnaires). Overall, my explorations in this thesis show that whilst coopetition for sustainability is a complex, tensionfilled phenomenon, it has great potential to advance sustainability in both theory and practice. I contribute to theory by generating novel insights into: (i) The process of coopetition for sustainability showing how actors organize collaboration for sustainability and how they respond to paradoxical tensions they frequently experience; (ii) The outcomes of coopetition for sustainability, which I systematically conceptualize and model. I also offer several implications for practice that can help managers to navigate the process of coopetition for sustainability in order to enhance economic, social and environmental outcomes.

Abstract [sv]

Forskare lyfter fram de potentiella vinsterna med samarbete mellan konkurrenter för att främja hållbarhet, men det saknas både teoretiska och empiriska studier. Syftet med denna avhandling är att öka förståelsen för"coopetition för hållbarhet", som jag definierar som "ett fenomen mellan företag där aktörer från samma bransch samtidigt samarbetar och konkurrerar med avsikt att uppnå ekologiska, ekonomiska och sociala fördelar". Genom att undersöka processen och utfallet av coopetition för hållbarhet utvecklar jag flera analytiska verktyg för att systematiskt utforska den coopetitiva interaktionen i syfte att nå hållbarhetsmål och visar att coopetition för hållbarhet ger upphov till många sammanvävda paradoxala spänningar. Vidare visar jag hur ett anta lorganiserings- och regleringsmekanismer används för att ta itu med dessa spänningar, mekanismer som kan medföra bättre hållbarhetsutfall.

Denna avhandling består av sex, bifogade, artiklar (två konceptuella, två kvalitativa och två kvantitativa) som utforskar coopetition för hållbarhet i tre kontextuella miljöer (den svenska-, polska- och belarusiska bostadsbranschen). Sammantaget spänner artiklarna över flera teoretiska ramverk (paradoxteori, hållbar värde-teori, modern portföljteori) och olika metodologiska tillvägagångssätt (systemdynamik, fördjupad fallstudie, enkätstudie).Avhandlingens undersökningar visar att även om coopetition för hållbarhet är ett komplext och spänningsfyllt fenomen har det samtidigt stor potential för att främja hållbarhet i både teori och praktik. Jag bidrar till teori genom att generera nya insikter om: (i) 'coopetition för hållbarhets'-processen, vilket visar hur aktörer organiserar samarbete för hållbarhet och hur de reagerar på de paradoxala spänningar som de ofta upplever; (ii) utfallen av coopetition för hållbarhet, som jag systematiskt konceptualiserar och modellerar. Jag förslår även implikationer för praxis, för att hjälpa ledare att navigera i processen för coopetition för hållbarhet och för att förbättra dess ekonomiska, sociala och ekologiska utfall.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Umeå: Umeå University, 2021. p. 88
Series
Studier i företagsekonomi. Serie B, ISSN 0346-8291 ; 107
Keywords
Coopetition, sustainability, paradox, housing, coopetition for sustainability, process, outcome
National Category
Business Administration
Research subject
Business Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-189472 (URN)978-91-7855-681-6 (ISBN)978-91-7855-680-9 (ISBN)
Public defence
2021-12-10, UB.A.210, Lindellhallen 1 (S Hörsal A), Umeå University 901 87, Umeå, 11:00 (English)
Opponent
Supervisors
Note

Ny tid för disputation; kl 11:00 istället för 13:00 / New time for the public defence; 11:00 instead of 13:00 

Available from: 2021-11-19 Created: 2021-11-11 Last updated: 2021-12-03Bibliographically approved
Manzhynski, S. & Figge, F. (2020). Coopetition for sustainability: Between organizational benefit and societal good. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29, 827-837
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Coopetition for sustainability: Between organizational benefit and societal good
2020 (English)In: Business Strategy and the Environment, ISSN 0964-4733, E-ISSN 1099-0836, Vol. 29, p. 827-837Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Sustainable development requires coopetition, that is, the cooperation of organiza-tions that compete at the same time. Research on coopetition for sustainability issparse. From a sustainability perspective, coopetition contributes to sustainabilitywhen it makes a positive contribution on the societal level. Existing research oncoopetition however focuses on organizational outcomes. In this paper, we link orga-nizational and societal outcomes of coopetition. We show that for the simple case oftwo coopting firms and an economic and an environmental dimension, there are 51different combinations that make a positive contribution to sustainability. All butone of these combinations consist of a mix of positive and negative outcomes. Weidentify four types of trade‐offs that can occur in coopetition for sustainability andthat point to different pathways of achieving sustainability.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
John Wiley & Sons, 2020
Keywords
coopetition, industrial symbiosis, sustainable development, tensions, trade‐offs, Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law, Strategy and Management, Geography, Planning and Development, Business and International Management
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-166059 (URN)10.1002/bse.2400 (DOI)000518235200004 ()2-s2.0-85076100538 (Scopus ID)
Funder
The Kamprad Family Foundation, 20160063
Available from: 2019-12-09 Created: 2019-12-09 Last updated: 2023-03-24Bibliographically approved
Manzhynski, S., Stål, H. & Bengtsson, M. (2020). Dealing with knotted paradoxes: A system dynamics approach to coopetition for sustainability. In: : . Paper presented at 36th European Group for Organizational Studies (EGOS) Colloquium “Organizing for a Sustainable Future: Responsibility, Renewal & Resistance”, Hamburg, Germany, June 30 – July 4, 2020..
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Dealing with knotted paradoxes: A system dynamics approach to coopetition for sustainability
2020 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation only (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Organizational members are likely to face more than one paradox simultaneously. In order to conceptualize how paradoxes are knotted together and influence each other, paradox research needs to better account for dynamics and integrative aspects. In this paper we introduce the System Dynamics approach which we apply to coopetition for sustainability. Via an in-depth case study of a large-scale Swedish project to create a brand new, sustainable residential area, we are able to trace how the two paradoxes (coopetition and sustainability) influence each other but also take turns in dominating the processual unfolding. Our study contributes by developing and illustrating an approach to conceptualizing knotted paradoxes in general and coopetition for sustainability in particular.

Keywords
Paradox, tensions, system dynamics, coopetition for sustainability, knotted paradoxes
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-178810 (URN)
Conference
36th European Group for Organizational Studies (EGOS) Colloquium “Organizing for a Sustainable Future: Responsibility, Renewal & Resistance”, Hamburg, Germany, June 30 – July 4, 2020.
Available from: 2021-01-18 Created: 2021-01-18 Last updated: 2021-02-22Bibliographically approved
Organisations
Identifiers
ORCID iD: ORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0003-0499-2927

Search in DiVA

Show all publications