SpringerLink
Log in

Sustainable Value Management: Pluralistic, Multi-Criteria, and Long-Term Decision-Making

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Responsible Research for Better Business

Abstract

As a consequence of global and local dynamics, the reality of doing business around the world is changing, which im**es upon Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” to self-regulate economic activities and shared social welfare while protecting humanity’s endowment: nature. The last two decades have witnessed an unprecedented scholarship and professional development on sustainability, social responsibility, and ethics in the business and management literature. We argue that the internalization of sustainability into responsible research in business and management (RRBM) should be explicitly founded on sustainable business value management, which is pluralistic (multiple stakeholders along the value chain), multi-criteria (multiple value dimensions), and long term (value accumulates and decays over time and space). Our position is aligned with all RRBM’s main principles, but particularly service to the society, stakeholder involvement and impact on stakeholders. In this chapter, we argue for the development of responsible decision-making frameworks in business and management that are founded on inclusivity of stakeholders (sometimes including reconciliation), multidimensional value (e.g., triple bottom line) creation, and long-term governance (in opposition to short-term). Sustainable value management is therefore not only about reporting, but also about changing the decision-making mind set, processes and methods.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
EUR 29.95
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
EUR 85.59
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
EUR 106.99
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
EUR 106.99
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    For illustration purpose and not intended as theoretical representation.

  2. 2.

    The space shown in Fig. 3 represents the boundaries of potential feasible decisions.

  3. 3.

    Fig. 4 (A): an environmentally good decision creates value while reconciling financial (\( \vartheta_{f} \)) and environmental (\( \vartheta_{e} \)) outcomes without surrendering one to the other. In opposition, an environmentally bad decision yields possible value by the destruction of both financial (\( \vartheta_{f} \)) and environmental (\( \vartheta_{e} \)) outcomes. An altruistic environmental decision represents a philanthropic decision where the financial value is surrendered to create a better environment. Alternatively, a selfish environmental decision will sacrifice the environment to create private wealth. Figure 4 (B): a socially good decision creates value while reconciling financial (\( \vartheta_{f} \)) and social (\( \vartheta_{s} \)) outcomes without surrendering one to the other. In opposition, an environmentally bad decision yields possible value by the destruction of both financial (\( \vartheta_{f} \)) and social (\( \vartheta_{s} \)) outcomes. An altruistic social decision represents a philanthropic decision where the financial value is surrendered to create a better society. Alternatively, a selfish social decision will sacrifice the common social good to create private wealth. Figure 4 (C): These types of situations are rarely discussed. A socially and environmentally good decision creates value by reconciling social (\( \vartheta_{s} \)) and environmental (\( \vartheta_{e} \)) outcomes without surrendering one to the other. In opposition, a socially and environmentally bad decision destroys both social (\( \vartheta_{s} \)) and environmental (\( \vartheta_{e} \)) outcomes. An altruistic social decision represents a situation where a community sacrifices its wellbeing or welfare to create a better natural environment. Alternatively, a selfish social decision will sacrifice the environment in favour of social welfare or wellbeing.

References

  • Aguinis, H., and A. Glavas. 2012. What We Know and Don’t Know About Corporate Social Responsibility: A Review and Research Agenda. Journal of Management 38 (4): 932–968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Albareda, L., J.M. Lozano, and T. Ysa. 2007. Public Policies on Corporate Social Responsibility: The Role of Governments in Europe. Journal of Business Ethics 74 (4): 391–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allais, M. 1953. Le Comportement de l’Homme Rationnel devant le Risque: Critique des Postulats et Axiomes de l’Ecole Americaine. Econometrica 21 (4): 503–546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1995. The Real Foundations of the Alleged Errors in Allais’ Impossibility Theorem: Unceasingly Repeated Errors or Contradictions of Mark Machina. Theory and Decision 38 (3): 251–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, W.T. 2017. Our Schizophrenic Conception of the Business Corporation. In Corporate Governance, 79–99. Gower.

    Google Scholar 

  • Altman, W. 2007. Working for the Greater Good? (Sustainability CSR). Engineering Management Journal 17 (6): 12–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alves de Albuquerque, G., P. Maciel, R.M.F. Lima, and F. Magnani. 2013. Strategic and Tactical Evaluation of Conflicting Environment and Business Goals in Green Supply Chains. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems 43 (5): 1013–1027.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Antonescu, D. 2018. Are Business Leaders Prepared to Handle the Upcoming Revolution in Business Artificial Intelligence? Quality-Access to Success 19 (166): 15–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anzai, Y. 1984. Cognitive Control of Real-Time Event-Driven Systems. Cognitive Science 8 (3): 221–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Apple. 2019. Apple Supplier Responsibility 2019 Progress Report: 66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, K.J. 1951. Alternative Approaches to the Theory of Choice in Risk-Taking Situations. Econometrica 19 (4): 404–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1959. Choice Functions and Orderings. Econometrica 27: 697.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barata, J.F.F., O.L.G. Quelhas, H.G. Costa, R.H. Gutierrez, V.D. Lameira, and M.J. Meirino. 2014. Multi-Criteria Indicator for Sustainability Rating in Suppliers of the Oil and Gas Industries in Brazil. Sustainability 6 (3): 1107–1128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrientos, S., C. Dolan, and A. Tallontire. 2003. A Gendered Value Chain Approach to Codes of Conduct in African Horticulture. World Development 31 (9): 1511–1526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beare, D., R. Buslovich, and C. Searcy. 2014. Linkages Between Corporate Sustainability Reporting and Public Policy. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 21 (6): 336–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bechtel, W., and A. Abrahamsen. 1991. Connectionism and the Mind: An Introduction to Parallel Processing in Networks. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, C.U. 2012. Limits and Potential of Traditional Moral Philosophy and Current Ethics—Some Arguments for the Need for a New Type of Sustainability Ethics. In Sustainability Ethics and Sustainability Research, 21–31. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, G.S. 1976. The Economic Approach to Human Behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bellman, R. 1957. A Markovian Decision Process. Journal of Mathematics and Mechanics 6 (5): 679–684.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennis, W.G., and J. J. H. b. r. O’Toole. 2005. How Business Schools Lost Their Way. Harvard Business Review 83 (5): 96–104, 154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackburn, W.R. 2012. The Sustainability Handbook: The Complete Management Guide to Achieving Social, Economic and Environmental Responsibility. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boddy, C. 2011. Corporate Psychopaths: Organisational Destroyers. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brehmer, B. 1992. Dynamic Decision Making: Human Control of Complex Systems. Acta Psychologica (Amst) 81 (3): 211–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burkhardt, J. 1989. The Morality Behind Sustainability. Journal of Agricultural Ethics 2 (2): 113–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byron, M. 1998. Satisficing and Optimality. Ethics 109 (1): 67–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byron, M. 2004. Satisficing and Maximizing: Moral Theorists on Practical Reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cairns, G., P. Goodwin, and G. Wright. 2016. A Decision-Analysis-Based Framework for Analysing Stakeholder Behaviour in Scenario Planning. European Journal of Operational Research 249 (3): 1050–1062.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cantele, S., and A. Zardini. 2018. Is Sustainability a Competitive Advantage for Small Businesses? An Empirical Analysis of Possible Mediators in the Sustainability–Financial Performance Relationship. Journal of Cleaner Production 182: 166–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chindarkar, N., and D.J. Thampapillai. 2018. Rethinking Teaching of Basic Principles of Economics from a Sustainability Perspective. Sustainability 10 (5): 1486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, L.J., E. Peirce, L.P. Hartman, W.M. Hoffman, and J. Carrier. 2007. Ethics, CSR, and Sustainability Education in the Financial Times Top 50 Global Business Schools: Baseline Data and Future Research Directions. Journal of Business Ethics 73 (4): 347–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Churchman, C.W. 1967. Free for All. Management Science 14 (4): B-141–B-146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, T., and M. Boersma. 2015. The Governance of Global Value Chains: Unresolved Human Rights, Environmental and Ethical Dilemmas in the Apple Supply Chain. Journal of Business Ethics, online.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clinebell, S.K., and J.M. Clinebell. 2008. The Tension in Business Education Between Academic Rigor and Real-World Relevance: The Role of Executive Professors. Academy of Management Learning & Education 7 (1): 99–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J.S. 1990. Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crisan, C., and A. Adi. 2017. A New Paradigm: How Social Movements Shape Corporate Social Responsibility After the Financial Crisis. In Corporate Social Responsibility in the Post-Financial Crisis Era, 63–82. Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daly, H.E., and J.B. Cobb. 1994. For the Common Good: Redirecting the Economy Toward Community, the Environment, and a Sustainable Future. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Damodaran, S. 2010. Upgradation or Flexible Casualization? Exploring the Dynamics of Global Value Chain Incorporation in the Indian Leather Industry. In Labour in Global Production Networks in India, ed. A. Posthuma and D. Nathan, 231–250. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dandira, M. 2012. Dysfunctional Leadership: Organizational Cancer. Business Strategy Series 13 (4): 187–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Della Bruna, E., Jr., E.B. Edgar, D. Ely Laureano, L. Ensslin, and S. Rolim Ensslin. 2014. An MCDA-C Application to Evaluate Supply Chain Performance. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 44 (7): 597–616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, J. 2005. Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dominelli, L. 2012. Green Social Work: From Environmental Crises to Environmental Justice. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowding, K., and A. Hindmoor. 1997. The Usual Suspects: Rational Choice, Socialism and Political Theory. New Political Economy 2 (3): 451–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dutta, K. 2018. Solving Wicked Problems: Searching for the Critical Cognitive Trait. International Journal of Management Education 16 (3): 493–503.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebegbulem, J.C. 2012. Corruption and Leadership Crisis in Africa: Nigeria in Focus. International Journal of Business and Social Science 3 (11): 221–227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, W. 1954. The Theory of Decision Making. Psychological Bulletin 51 (4): 380–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1962. Dynamic Decision Theory and Probabilistic Information Processings. Human Factors 4 (2): 59–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. Directorate-General for Employment, S.A., and Equal Opportunities. Unit, D. 2007. Corporate Social Responsibility: National Public Policies in the European Union. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishburn, P.C., and I.H. LaValle. 1998. Subjective Expected Lexicographic Utility: Axioms and Assessment. Annals of Operations Research 80: 183–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flood, M.M. 1952. The Influence of Enviromental Nonstationarity in a Sequential Decision-Making Experiment. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fodor, J.A., and Z.W. Pylyshyn. 1988. Connectionism and Cognitive Architecture: A Critical Analysis. Cognition 28 (1–2): 3–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foxon, T.J., J. Köhler, J. Michie, and C. Oughton. 2012. Towards a New Complexity Economics for Sustainability. Cambridge Journal of Economics 37 (1): 187–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R.E. 1984. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Perspective, vol. 13. Boston: Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R.E., A.C. Wicks, and B. Parmar. 2004. Stakeholder Theory and “The Corporate Objective Revisited”. Organization Science 15 (3): 364–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. 1970. The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits. The New York Times Magazine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frini, A., A. Guitouni, and J.M. Martel. 2012. A General Decomposition Approach for Multi-Criteria Decision Trees. European Journal of Operational Research 220 (2): 452–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fry, H.G. 1957. Application of the Theories of Rational Choice and Marginal Utility in the Decision-Making Process. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Library.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gamerschlag, R., K. Möller, and F. Verbeeten. 2011. Determinants of Voluntary CSR Disclosure: Empirical Evidence from Germany. Review of Managerial Science 5 (2–3): 233–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gereffi, G. 1994. The Organization of Buyer-Driven Global Commodity Chains: How US Retailers Shape Overseas Production Networks. In Commodity Chains and Global Capitalism, vol. 149. Westpost: ABC-CLIO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gereffi, G., J. Humphrey, and T. Sturgeon. 2005. The Governance of Global Value Chains. Review of International Political Economy 12: 78–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gereffi, G., and J. Lee. 2014. Economic and Social Upgrading in Global Value Chains and Industrial Clusters: Why Governance Matters. Journal of Business Ethics 133 (1): 25–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2016. Economic and Social Upgrading in Global Value Chains and Industrial Clusters: Why Governance Matters. Journal of Business Ethics 13: 25–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbon, P., J. Bair, and S. Ponte. 2008. Governing Global Value Chains: An Introduction. Economy and Society 37: 315–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glavič, P., and R. Lukman. 2007. Review of Sustainability Terms and Their Definitions. Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (18): 1875–1885.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glyn, E., and M.-S. Talya. 2010. Deliberation Before Determination: The Definition and Evaluation of Good Decision Making. Health Expectations 13 (2): 139–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodin, R.E. 1999. The Sustainability Ethic: Political, Not Just Moral. Journal of Applied Philosophy 16 (3): 247–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gowdy, J. 2007. Avoiding Self-Organized Extinction: Toward a Co-evolutionary Economics of Sustainability. The International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology 14 (1): 27–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gradin, S. 2016. Rethinking the Notion of ‘Value’ in Global Value Chains Analysis: A Decolonial Political Economy Perspective. Competition & Change 20 (5): 353–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guitouni, A., and J.M. Martel. 1998. Tentative Guidelines to Help Choosing an Appropriate MCDA Method. European Journal of Operational Research 109 (2): 501–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haimes, Y.Y. 2015. Risk Modeling, Assessment, and Management. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, J.S., and A.C. Wicks. 2015. Stakeholder Theory, Value, and Firm Performance. Business Ethics Quarterly 23 (1): 97–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harte, M.J. 1995. Ecology, Sustainability, and Environment as Capital. Ecological Economics 15 (2): 157–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helfat, C.E., and K.M. Eisenhardt. 2004. Inter-temporal Economies of Scope, Organizational Modularity, and the Dynamics of Diversification. Strategic Management Journal 25 (13): 1217–1232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henriques, A., and J. Richardson. 2004. The Triple Bottom Line: Does It All Add Up? Assessing the Sustainability of Business and CSR. Sterling, VA, London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, C.W., and T.M. Jones. 1992. Stakeholder-Agency Theory. Journal of Management Studies 29 (2): 131–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hindmoor, A. 2011. ‘Major Combat Operations Have Ended’? Arguing About Rational Choice. British Journal of Political Science 41 (1): 191–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschland, M.J. 2006. Corporate Social Responsibility and the Sha** of Global Public Policy, 1st ed. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hoover, J.D., R.C. Giambatista, R.L. Sorenson, and W.H. Bommer. 2010. Assessing the Effectiveness of Whole Person Learning Pedagogy in Skill Acquisition. Academy of Management Learning & Education 9 (2): 192–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Htay, S.N.N., H.M. Ab Rashid, M.A. Adnan, and A.K.M. Meera. 2012. Impact of Corporate Governance on Social and Environmental Information Disclosure of Malaysian Listed Banks: Panel Data Analysis. Asian Journal of Finance & Accounting 4 (1): 1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hull, C.E., and S. Rothenberg. 2008. Firm Performance: The Interactions of Corporate Social Performance with Innovation and Industry Differentiation. Strategic Management Journal 29 (7): 781–789.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Idowu, S.O., N. Capaldi, L. Zu, A.D. Gupta, and SpringerLink. 2013. Encyclopedia of Corporate Social Responsibility. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Idowu, S.O., C.S. Frederiksen, A.Y. Mermod, and M.E.J. Nielsen. 2015. Corporate Social Responsibility and Governance: Theory and Practice. Cham: Springer International Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Idowu, S.O., S. Vertigans, and A.S. Burlea. 2017. Corporate Social Responsibility in Times of Crisis: Practices and Cases from Europe, Africa and the World. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, C., S. Sen, and C.B. Bhattacharya. 2015. Corporate Crises in the Age of Corporate Social Responsibility. Business Horizons 58 (2): 183–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joyner, B.E., and D. Payne. 2002. Evolution and Implementation: A Study of Values, Business Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics 41 (4): 297–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., P. Slovic, and A. Tversky. 1982. Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., and A. Tversky. 1979. Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk. Econometrica (pre-1986) 47 (2): 263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1983. Can Irrationality be Intelligently Discussed? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 6 (3): 509–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2000. Choices, Values, and Frames. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kauder, E. 2015. History of Marginal Utility Theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kellerman, B. 2004. Bad Leadership: What It Is, How It Happens, Why It Matters. Boston: Harvard Business Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, K.-H., M. Kim, and C. Qian. 2018. Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility on Corporate Financial Performance: A Competitive-Action Perspective. Journal of Management 44 (3): 1097–1118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolk, A. 2003. Trends in Sustainability Reporting by the Fortune Global 250. Business Strategy and the Environment 12 (5): 279–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krantz, D.H., and A. Tversky. 1971. Conjoint-Measurement Analysis of Composition Rules in Psychology. Psychological Review 78 (2): 151–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S. 1982. Commensurability, Comparability, Communicability. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982 (2): 669–688.

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, R. 2013. The Promise and Limits of Private Power: Promoting Labor Standards in a Global Economy. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Locke, R., M. Amengual, and A. Mangla. 2009. Virtue Out of Necessity? Compliance, Commitment, and the Improvement of Labor Conditions in Global Supply Chains. Politics & Society 37: 319–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lokesh, K., L. Ladu, and L. Summerton. 2018. Bridging the Gaps for a ‘Circular’ Bioeconomy: Selection Criteria, Bio-Based Value Chain and Stakeholder Map**. Sustainability 10 (6): 1695.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lozano, J.M., L. Albareda, T. Ysa, H. Roscher, M. Marcuccio, and SpringerLink. 2008. Governments and Corporate Social Responsibility: Public Policies Beyond Regulation and Voluntary Compliance. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lubin, D.A., and D.C. Esty. 2010. The Sustainability Imperative. Harvard Business Review 88 (5): 42–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lund-Thomsen, P., and A. Lindgreen. 2014. Corporate Social Responsibility in Global Value Chains: Where Are We Now and Where Are We Going? Journal of Business Ethics 123: 11–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lund-Thomsen, P., and K. Nadvi. 2010. Global Value Chains, Local Collective Action and Corporate Social Responsibility: A Review of Empirical Evidence. Business Strategy and the Environment 19 (1): 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo, X., & X. Xu. 2018. Infrastructure, Value Chains, and Economic Upgrades. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, J.G. 1978. Bounded Rationality, Ambiguity, and the Engineering of Choice. The Bell Journal of Economics 9 (2): 587–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mardani, A., A. Jusoh, K.M.D. Nor, Z. Khalifah, N. Zakwan, and A. Valipour. 2015. Multiple Criteria Decision-Making Techniques and their Applications—A Review of the Literature from 2000 to 2014. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istrazivanja 28 (1): 516–571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Margolis, J.D., and J.P. Walsh. 2003. Misery Loves Companies: Rethinking Social Initiatives by Business. Administrative Science Quarterly 48 (2): 268–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, F., and G. Gereffi. 2010. Regulation and Economic Globalization: Prospects and Limits of Private Governance. Business and Politics 12 (3): 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCleskey, J. 2013. The Dark Side of Leadership: Measurement, Assessment, and Intervention. Business Renaissance Quarterly 8 (2/3): 35.

    Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A., and D. Siegel. 2001. Corporate Social Responsibility: A Theory of the Firm Perspective. The Academy of Management Review 26 (1): 117–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A., D.S. Siegel, and P.M. Wright. 2006. Corporate Social Responsibility: Strategic Implications. Journal of Management Studies 43 (1): 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mezzadri, A. 2014. Indian Garment Clusters and CSR Norms: Incompatible Agendas at the Bottom of the Garment Commodity Chain. Oxford Development Studies 42: 238–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M.P., and J.G. Covin. 2000. Environmental Marketing: A Source of Reputational, Competitive, and Financial Advantage. Journal of Business Ethics 23 (3): 299–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. 2004. Managers, Not MBAs: A Hard Look at the Soft Practice of Managing and Management Development. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R.K., B.R. Agle, and D.J. Wood. 1997. Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What Really Counts. Academy of Management Review 22 (4): 853–886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R.K., J.H. Lee, and B.R. Agle. 2017. Stakeholder Prioritization Work: The Role of Stakeholder Salience in Stakeholder Research. In Stakeholder Management, 123–157. Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R.K., G.R. Weaver, B.R. Agle, A.D. Bailey, and J. Carlson. 2016. Stakeholder Agency and Social Welfare: Pluralism and Decision Making in the Multi-Objective Corporation. Academy of Management Review 41 (2): 252–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulyadi, M.S., and Y. Anwar. 2012. Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility Toward Firm Value and Profitability. The Business Review, Cambridge 19 (2): 316–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nadvi, K. 2004. Globalisation and Poverty: How Can Global Value Chain Research Inform the Policy Debate? IDS Bulletin 35 (1): 20–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ng, I.C., and L.A. Smith. 2012. An Integrative Framework of Value [Special Issue–Toward a Better Understanding of the Role of Value in Markets and Marketing]. Review of Marketing Research, 207–243. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholson, J., and E. Kurucz. 2017. Relational Leadership for Sustainability: Building an Ethical Framework from the Moral Theory of ‘Ethics of Care’. Journal of Business Ethics 156 (1): 25–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, M., Jr. 1965. The Logic of Collective Action; Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orlitzky, M., F.L. Schmidt, and S.L. Rynes. 2003. Corporate Social and Financial Performance: A Meta-Analysis. Organization Studies 24 (3): 403–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pajunen, K. 2006. Stakeholder Influences in Organizational Survival. Journal of Management Studies 43 (6): 1261–1288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, M. 2018. Why We Should Bulldoze the Business School; There are 13,000 Business Schools on Earth. That’s 13,000 Too Many. And I Should Know—I’ve Taught in Them for 20 Years. By Martin Parker. The Guardian (London, England). Guardian Newspapers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pipkin, S., and A. Fuentes. 2017. Spurred to Upgrade: A Review of Triggers and Consequences of Industrial Upgrading in the Global Value Chain Literature. World Development 98: 536–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Posthuma, A., and D. Nathan (eds.). 2010. Labour in Global Production Networks in India. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puppim de Oliveira, J. (ed.). 2008. Upgrading Clusters and Small Enterprises in Develo** Countries: Environmental, Labor, Innovation and Social Issues. Burlington: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahim, M.M. 2013. Legal Regulation of Corporate Social Responsibility: A Meta-Regulation Approach of Law for Raising CSR in a Weak Economy, 2013th ed. Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Raiborn, C.A., and D. Payne. 1990. Corporate Codes of Conduct: A Collective Conscience and Continuum. Journal of Business Ethics 9 (11): 879–889.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raworth, K. 2004. Trading Away our Rights: Women Working in Global Supply Chains. Oxford: Oxfam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reichelt, B., and F. Peldschus. 2005. The Application of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (mcda) in Risk Management of Civil and Environmental Engineering Projects. Foundations of Civil and Environmental Engineering (FCEE) 6: 159–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riker, W.H. 1962. The Theory of Political Coalitions. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. 1992. Environmental Conservation 19 (4): 366–368. https://doi.org/10.1017/S037689290003157X.

  • Roberts, F.S. 1984. Measurement Theory with Applications to Decision Making, Utility, and the Social Sciences. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez-Rad, C.J., and E. Ramos-Hidalgo. 2018. Spirituality, Consumer Ethics, and Sustainability: The Mediating Role of Moral Identity. Journal of Consumer Marketing 35 (1): 51–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez, C.A., B.M. Turner, and S.M. McClure. 2014. Intertemporal Choice as Discounted Value Accumulation. PLoS ONE 9 (2): e90138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, A.V., A.A. Tsay, M.E. Pullman, and J.V. Gray. 2008. Unraveling the Food Supply Chain: Strategic Insights from China and the 2007 Recalls. Journal of Supply Chain Management 44 (1): 22–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubinstein, A. 1998. Modeling Bounded Rationality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sacconi, L., M. Blair, R.E. Freeman, A. Vercelli, and SpringerLink. 2011. Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Governance: The Contribution of Economic Theory and Related Disciplines. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salzmann, O., A. Ionescu-Somers, and U. Steger. 2005. The Business Case for Corporate Sustainability: Literature Review and Research Options. European Management Journal 23 (1): 27–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarpong, S. 2017. Corporate Social Responsibility in Ghana: Issues and Concerns. In Corporate Social Responsibility in Times of Crisis, 191–205. Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scharpf, F.W. 1997. Games Real Actors Play: Actor-Centered Institutionalism in Policy Research. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlag, M., and J.A. Mercado. 2012. Free Markets and the Culture of Common Good, 1. Aufl.; 2012 ed. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Searcy, C. 2012. Corporate Sustainability Performance Measurement Systems: A Review and Research Agenda. Journal of Business Ethics 107 (3): 239–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H.A. 1979. Rational Decision Making in Business Organizations. The American Economic Review 69 (4): 493–513.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slater, S.F. 1997. Develo** a Customer Value-Based Theory of the Firm. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 25 (2): 162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soundararajan, V., and J.A. Brown. 2016. Voluntary Governance Mechanisms in Global Supply Chains: Beyond CSR to a Stakeholder Utility Perspective. Journal of Business Ethics 134 (1): 83–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoycheva, S., D. Marchese, C. Paul, S. Padoan, A.S. Juhmani, and I. Linkov. 2018. Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Framework for Sustainable Manufacturing in Automotive Industry. Journal of Cleaner Production 187: 257–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Takala, T. 2010. Dark Leadership, Charisma and Trust. Psychology 1 (1): 59–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Theofilou, A., G. Grigore, and A. Stancu. 2017. Corporate Social Responsibility in the Post-Financial Crisis Era: CSR Conceptualisations and International Practices in Times of Uncertainty. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., and D. Kahneman. 1973. Availability: A Heuristic for Judging Frequency and Probability. Cognitive Psychology 5 (2): 207–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1974. Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science 185 (4157): 1124–1131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1981. The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice. Science 211 (4481): 453–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1986. Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions. The Journal of Business (1986–1998) 59 (4): IIS251.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNCTAD. 2013. World Investment Report 2013: Global Value Chains: Investment and Trade for Development. New York: United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Unerman, J., J. Bebbington, and B. O’Dwyer. 2010. Introduction to Sustainability Accounting and Accountability. In Sustainability Accounting and Accountability, 20–35. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verweij, M., T.J. Senior, J.F. Domínguez, and R. Turner. 2015. Emotion, Rationality and Decision-Making: How to Link Affective and Social Neuroscience with Social Theory. Frontiers in Neuroscience 9: 332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verzat, C., J. Byrne, and A. Fayolle. 2009. Tangling with Spaghetti: Pedagogical Lessons From Games. Academy of Management Learning & Education 8 (3): 356–369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Visser, W. 2011. The Nature of CSR Leadership: Definitions, Characteristics and Paradoxes. CSR International Paper Series 4: 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • WCED, S.W.S. 1987. World Commission on Environment and Development. In Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilmarth, A.E., Jr. 2008. The Dark Side of Universal Banking: Financial Conglomerates and the Origins of the Subprime Financial Crisis. Connecticut Law Review 41: 963.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Gustavson School of Business, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada

    Adel Guitouni

Authors
  1. Adel Guitouni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adel Guitouni .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Business Ethics Center, Corvinus University of Budapest, Budapest, Hungary

    László Zsolnai

  2. The Anthesis Group, London, UK

    Mike J. Thompson

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Guitouni, A. (2020). Sustainable Value Management: Pluralistic, Multi-Criteria, and Long-Term Decision-Making . In: Zsolnai, L., Thompson, M. (eds) Responsible Research for Better Business. Palgrave Studies in Sustainable Business In Association with Future Earth. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37810-3_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation