PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
The impact of institutional environments on sustainability is well documented in the international business literature. However, how multiple and occasionally conflicting institutional logics shape sustainability as it is practiced by individuals across countries remains undertheorized. Our study contributes to this line of research by examining how multiple institutional logics inform the comprehension of sustainability practices in two high-hazard organizations in the Republic of Serbia and Canada. In doing so, our findings explicate three multi-level mechanisms - pulling down (1st level), relating (2nd level), and aligning (2nd level) - through which individuals in these organizations across two countries construct a localized understanding of sustainability. In both countries, individuals pull down elements of the state and organizational logics to construct meso-level logics they use to comprehend sustainability practices, albeit differently. In Serbia, due to the conflict between the current state logic and dominant high-hazard organizational logic, individuals pull down elements of the high-hazard organizational logic and the enduring legacy state logic to construct a community logic and align sustainability practices with it. In Canada, the state logic complements the high-hazard organizational logic, resulting in individuals pulling down elements of both logics to construct the professional logic and aligning their practice with it. In both countries, due to the dominance of the high-hazard organizational logic, individuals relate their practices to the well-being of others. Based on our comparative case analysis, we create a general model and a country-specific model depicting how individuals embed multiple institutional logics into their sustainability practices.
摘要：
机构环境对可持续性的影响在国际商业文献中有很好的记录。然而,在各国的个人实践中，多重和偶尔相互冲突的制度逻辑如何塑造可持续性仍然缺乏理论化。我们的研究通过研究多种制度逻辑如何为塞尔维亚共和国和加拿大的两个高风险组织的可持续发展实践的理解做出了贡献。在这样做的时候，我们的发现阐明了三个多层次的机制-下拉(一级)，相关(二级)，和调整（第二层次）-通过这两个国家的这些组织中的个人构建对可持续性的本地化理解。在这两个国家,个人拉下国家和组织逻辑的元素，以构建他们用来理解可持续发展实践的中观逻辑，尽管不同。在塞尔维亚,由于当前状态逻辑和主导的高危险组织逻辑之间的冲突，个人拉下高风险组织逻辑和持久遗留状态逻辑的要素，以构建社区逻辑并使可持续性实践与之保持一致。在加拿大,国家逻辑补充了高风险的组织逻辑，导致个人拉下两个逻辑的元素来构建专业逻辑并使他们的实践与之保持一致。在这两个国家,由于高风险组织逻辑的主导地位，个人将他们的实践与他人的福祉联系起来。根据我们的比较案例分析，我们创建了一个通用模型和一个特定国家的模型，描述了个人如何将多种制度逻辑嵌入到他们的可持续发展实践中。
