The role of information systems in shaping integrative logic for business sustainability

• Authors: TWOREK Katarzyna , WALECKA-JANKOWSKA Katarzyna , ZGRZYWA-ZIEMAK Anna
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The article refers to a valid and current research area, which is the role of information technology (IT) in the formation of business sustainability (BS). The main objective of this article is to identify the role of IT in shaping sustainable organization in the context of different, partly conflicting, approaches to BS and empirical verification of the proposed theoretical framework. The article describes key differences between BS approaches in case cognitive logic (reductionist versus integrative logic) and axiological (individualistic-egoistic versus holistic-altruistic axiology) distinction. Theoretical role of IT in shaping integrative logic for BS is identified and presented. The proposed theoretical concept is empirically verified. The verification is based on empirical studies conducted in 400 SMEs operating in Poland in 2017.

Keywords

EN

business sustainability; information technology; IT reliability; organizational performance; system approach

• Publisher: Politechnika Wrocławska. Oficyna Wydawnicza Politechniki Wrocławskiej
• Journal: Operations Research and Decisions
• Year: 2019
• Volume: 29
• Issue: 4
• Pages: 125-146

Contributors

author

TWOREK Katarzyna

• Faculty of Computer Science and Management, Wrocław University of Science and Technology, ul. Łukasiewicza 5, 50-371 Wrocław, Poland

author

WALECKA-JANKOWSKA Katarzyna

• Faculty of Computer Science and Management, Wrocław University of Science and Technology, ul. Łukasiewicza 5, 50-371 Wrocław, Poland

author

ZGRZYWA-ZIEMAK Anna

• Faculty of Computer Science and Management, Wrocław University of Science and Technology, ul. Łukasiewicza 5, 50-371 Wrocław, Poland

References

• AMINI M., BIENSTOCK C.C., Corporate sustainability. An integrative definition and framework to evaluate corporate practice and guide academic research, J. Cleaner Prod., 2014, 76, 12–19.
• BANSAL P., DESJARDINE M.R., Business sustainability. It is about time, Strat. Org., 2014, 12 (1), 70–78.
• BARILE S., SAVIANO M., IANDOLO F., CALABRESE M., The viable systems approach and its contribution to the analysis of sustainable business behaviors, Syst. Res. Behav. Sci., 2014, 31 (6), 683–695.
• BARNES, S.A., The differential impact of ICT on employees. Narratives from a hi‐tech organisation, New Techn., Work Empl., 2012, 27, 120–132.
• BOIRAL O., HENRI J.F., Modeling the impacts of corporate commitment on climate change, Business Strat. Environ., 2012, 21 (8), 495–516.
• CAMPOS L.M.S., DE MELO HEIZEN D.A., VERDINELLI M.A., CAUCHICK MIGUEL P.A., Environmental performance indicators. A study on ISO 14001 certified companies, J. Clean. Prod., 2015, 99, 286–296.
• CHO C.H., LAINE M., ROBERTS R.W., RODRIGUE M., Organized hypocrisy, organizational façades, and sustainability reporting, Acc., Org. Soc., 2015, 40, 78–94.
• CLARKSON P.M., LI Y., RICHARDSON G.D., VASVARI F.P., Revisiting the relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure. An empirical analysis, Acc., Org. Soc., 2008, 33 (4), 303–327.
• CLIFTON D., AMRAN A., The stakeholder approach. A sustainability perspective, J. Bus. Eth., 2011, 98 (1), 121–136.
• CRANE A., PALAZZO G., SPENCE L.J., MATTEN D., Contesting the value of creating shared value, Calif. Manage. Rev., 2014, 56 (2), 130–153.
• DAVIS F.D., A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems. Theory and results, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1986.
• DE WET W., KOEKEMOER E., NEL J.A., Exploring the impact of information and communication technology on employees work and personal lives, SA J. Ind. Psych., 2016, 42 (1), 1–11.
• DELONE W.H., MCLEAN E.R., The Delone and McLean model of information systems success. A ten-year update, J. Manage. Inf. Syst., 2003, 19 (4).
• DOHERTY N.F., CHAMPION D., WANG L., A holistic approach to understanding the changing nature of organisational structure, Inf. Techn. People, 2010, 23, 3.
• DRAGOMIRESCU H., BIANCO L., Tackling sustainability from a systemic perspective. A contextualized approach, Probl. Sust. Dev., 2017, 12 (1), 9.
• DYLLICK T., MUFF K., Clarifying the meaning of sustainable business. Introducing a typology from business-as-usual to true business sustainability, Org. Environ., 2016, 29 (2), 156–174.
• ESPINOSA A., PORTER T., Sustainability, complexity and learning. Insights from complex systems approaches, Learn. Org., 2011, 18 (1), 54.
• FATH B.D., Quantifying economic and ecological sustainability, Ocean Coastal Manage., 2015, 108, 13–19.
• FEENY D.F., IVES B., In Search of Sustainability. Reaping Long-term Advantage from Investments in Information Technology, J. Manage. Inf. Syst., 1990, 7 (1), 27–32.
• FIKSEL J., Sustainability and resilience. Toward a systems approach, Sust. Sci., Pract. Pol., 2006, 2 (2), 7.
• GAO J., The evolution of business sustainability. Historical trajectory and structural relationships, The University of Western Ontario, Ontario 2008.
• GAO J., BANSAL P., Instrumental and integrative logics in business sustainability, J. Bus. Ethics, 2013, 112 (2), 14.
• GRI, Sustainability reporting guidelines (g4), Global Reporting Initiative, 2013.
• HAHN T., PINKSE J., PREUSS L., FIGGE F., Tensions in corporate sustainability. Towards an integrative framework, J. Bus. Ethics, 2015, 127 (2), 297–316.
• HARRIS D.L., TWOMEY D.F., The enterprise perspective. A new mind-set for competitiveness and sustainability, Comp. Rev.: Int. Bus. J., 2010, 20 (3), 258–266.
• HART S.L., MILSTEIN M.B., Creating sustainable value, Acad. Manage. Exec., 2003, 17 (2), 56–67.
• HARTONO E., LI X., NA K.-S., SIMPSON J.T., The role of the quality of shared information in interorganizational systems use, Int. J. Inf. Manage., 2010, 30 (5), 399–407.
• HĄBEK P., Disclosure of results in the field of sustainable development of enterprises, Org. Rev., 2013, 12, 20–27 (in Polish).
• HONGMING X., CHANGYONG L., CHUNHUI C., Relationships among market orientation, learning orientation, organizational innovation and organizational performance. An empirical study in the pearl river delta region of China, Front. Bus. Res. China, 2007, 1 (2), 222–253.
• IHLEN Ø., It is five minutes to midnight, and all is quiet – corporate rhetoric and sustainability, Manage. Comm. Quart., 2015, 29 (1), 145–152.
• JENNINGS P.D., ZANDBERGEN P.A., Ecologically sustainable organizations. An institutional approach, Acad. Manage. Rev., 1995, 20 (4), 1015.
• JEFFERS P.I., Embracing sustainability. Information technology and the strategic leveraging of operations in third-party logistics, Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manage., 2010, 30 (3), 260–287.
• KAHNEMAN D., Thinking, Fast and Slow, MacMillan, 2011.
• KETTINGER W.J., GROVER V., GUHA S., SEGARS A.H., Strategic information systems revisited. A study in sustainability and performance, MIS Quart., 1994, 18 (1), 31–58.
• KORHONEN J., SNÄKIN J.-P., Analysing the evolution of industrial ecosystems. Concepts and application, Ecol. Econ., 2005, 52 (2), 169–186.
• LASRADO F., BAGCHI T., A cross-cultural evaluation of the contemporary workplace and its managerial implications, Int. J. Bus., Manage. Soc. Sci., 2011, 2 (1), 1–15.
• LÜSCHER L.S., LEWIS M.W., Organizational change and managerial sensemaking. Working through paradox, Acad. Manage. J., 2008, 51 (2), 221–240.
• LYYTINEN K., Different perspectives on information systems. Problems and solutions, ACM Comp. Surv. (CSUR), 1987, 19 (1), 5–46.
• MADDEN M., JONES S., Networked workers, Pew Internet and American Life Project, 2008.
• MALETIC M., MALETIC D., DAHLGAARD J., DAHLGAARD-PARK S.M., GOMIŠCEK B., Do corporate sustainability practices enhance organizational economic performance?, Int. J. Qual. Serv. Sci., 2015, 7 (2), 184–200.
• MARCHAND M., RAYMOND L., Researching performance measurement systems. an information systems perspective, International J. Oper. Prod. Manage., 2008, 28 (7), 663–686.
• MATIĆ I., Measuring the effects of learning on business performances. Proposed performance measurement model, J. Amer. Acad. Bus., 2012, 18 (1), 278.
• MCKENZIE S., Social sustainability. Towards some definitions, Hawke Research Institute Working Paper, Series No. 27, Hawke Research Institute, University of South Australia, Magill 2004.
• MILNE M.J., GRAY R., W(h)ither ecology? The triple bottom line, the global reporting initiative, and corporate sustainability reporting, J. Bus. Ethics, 2013, 118 (1), 13–29.
• PAPUZIŃSKI A., The axiology of sustainable development. An attempt at typologization, Probl. Sust. Dev., 2013, 8 (1), 5.
• PARK J.Y., IM K.S., KIM J.S., The role of IT human capability in the knowledge transfer process in it outsourcing context, Inf. Manage., 2011, 48 (1), 53–61.
• ARRISH B.D., Designing the sustainable enterprise, Futures, 2007, 39 (7), 846.
• PAVLOU P.A., EL SAWY O.A., The third hand. IT-enabled competitive advantage in turbulence through improvisational capabilities, Inf. Syst. Res., 2010, 21 (3), 443–471.
• PEPPARD J., WARD J., Beyond strategic information systems. towards an IS capability, J. Strat. Inf. Syst., 2004, 13 (2), 167–194.
• PORTER M.E., KRAMER M.R., Creating shared value, Harvard Bus. Rev., 2011, 89 (1), 62.
• PRZYCHODZEŃ W.K., Sustainable enterprise. Theory, practice, evaluation, education, POLTEXT, Warsaw 2013 (in Polish).
• RobecoSAM, http://www.Sustainability-indices.Com/sustainability-assessment/index.Jsp, 2017.
• SALZMANN O., IONESCU-SOMERS A., STEGER U., The business case for corporate sustainability. Literature review and research options, Eur. Manage. J., 2005, 23 (1), 27–36.
• SAVITZ A.W., WEBER K., The triple bottom line. How today’s best-run companies are achieving economic, social, and environmental success and how you can too, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco 2006.
• SHKROBOT M., ROPUSZYŃSKA-SURMA E., Polish and Ukrainian foresight into the directions for the innovation of power plants, Oper. Res. Dec., 2018, 28 (4), 47–70.
• SENGE P.M., SMITH B., KRUSCHWITZ N., LAUR J., SCHLEY S., The necessary revolution. How individuals and organizations are working together to create a sustainable world, Crown Business, New York 2010.
• SMITH P.A.C., SHARICZ C., The shift needed for sustainability, Learn. Org., 2011, 18 (1), 73–86.
• STERMAN J.D., Learning in and about complex systems, Syst. Dyn. Rev., 1994, 10 (2), 291–330.
• STUBBS W., COCKLIN C., Conceptualizing a sustainability business model, Org. Environ., 2008, 21, 103–127.
• TUSUBIRA F., MULIRA N., Integration of ICT in organizations. Challenges and best practice recommendations based on the experience of makerere university and other organizations, International ICT Conference, Kampala, Uganda, 2004.
• TWOREK K., Reliability model of information systems in organization, Zeszyty Naukowe, Organizacja i Zarządzanie, Politechnika Śląska, Gliwice 2016, 88, 335–342.
• UNERMAN J., CHAPMAN C., Academic contributions to enhancing accounting for sustainable development, Acc., Org. Soc., 2014, 39 (6), 385–394.
• VALLANCE S., PERKINS H.C., DIXON J.E., What is social sustainability? A clarification of concepts, Geoforum, 2011, 42 (2), 342–348.
• VAN MARREWIJK M., WERRE M., Multiple levels of corporate sustainability, J. Bus. Ethics, 2003, 44 (2), 107–119.
• WASHINGTON H., Demystifying sustainability. Towards real solutions, Routledge, 2015.
• ZAHEDI F., Reliability of information systems based on the critical success factors. Formulation, MIS Quart., 1987, 11 (2), 187–203.
• ZGRZYWA-ZIEMAK A., Discrepancies and paradoxes in the conception of business sustainability, [In:] H. Czubasiewicz, P. Grajewski, J. Waśniewski (Eds.), Perspective of success factors for organizations of the 21st century, Faculty of Management, University of Gdańsk, Sopot 2016, 323–331 (in Polish).
• ZGRZYWA-ZIEMAK A., Towards reporting for sustainable development, [In:] T. Dudycz, G. Osbert--Pociecha, B. Brycz (Eds.), Efficiency in business and economics, Springer, Cham 2018, 293–309.
• ZGRZYWA-ZIEMAK A., Model of business sustainability, Oficyna Wydawnicza Politechniki Wrocławskiej, Wrocław 2019 (in Polish).

Identifiers

DOI

10.37190/ord190406