Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Developing Fourth Generation Sustainability-Oriented Business Models: Towards Naïve, Native, and Narrative Intelligence

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Corporate Social Responsibility in Times of Crisis

Part of the book series: CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance ((CSEG))

Abstract

Our world is dealing with several pressing sustainability problems. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives seem to have failed: despite the actions firms have taken over the years to contribute to a better world in an ecological and social sense through directing their resources and competencies towards this goal, the world has been degrading on many important sustainability-related indicators. By implication, firms need to resort to other ways of integrating societal goals into their strategies, organizational architecture, and decision-making processes. Sustainability-oriented business models (SOBMs) may present a way to turn the tides. Adding to the developing discourse on this topic, this chapter identifies three generations of SOBMs and their limitations in realizing sustainable development as well as by presenting an interpretation of fourth generation SBOMs. In doing so, it integrates insights from evolutionary psychology and identifies three types of ‘sustainability intelligence’ firms need to develop in order to be successful in developing SOBMs.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Although our focus is particularly on businesses, it should be noted that the types of sustainability intelligence we identify here apply to other organizations as well. This includes organizations that want to explore SOBMs themselves, but also those organizations that are stakeholders of firms that want to co-create these business models .

  2. 2.

    This response may vary from neglecting demands, interests, and expectations to honouring demands, furthering interests, and cultivate expectations.

References

  • Ayres, R. (1999). Turning point: The end of the growth paradigm. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basu, K., & Palazzo, G. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: A process model of sensemaking. Academy of Management Review, 33, 122–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair, D., & Meyer, T. (1997). Tools for an interactive virtual cinema. In R. Trappl & P. Petta (Eds.), Creating personalities for synthetic actors: Towards autonomous personality agents (pp. 83–91). Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bocken, N., Short, S., Rana, P., & Evans, S. (2014). A literature and practice review to develop sustainable business model archetypes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 65, 42–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohnsack, R., Pinkse, J., & Kolk, A. (2014). Business models for sustainable technologies: Exploring business model evolution in the case of electric vehicles. Research Policy, 43, 284–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boons, F., & Lüdeke-Freund, F. (2013). Business models for sustainable innovation: state-of-the-art and steps towards a research agenda. Journal of Cleaner Production, 45, 9–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A., & Shabana, K. (2010). The business case for corporate social responsibility: A review of concepts, research and practice. International Journal of Management Review, 12, 85–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, L., Morsing, M., & Thyssen, O. (2013). CSR as aspirational talk. Organization, 20, 372–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ciulla, J. (2005). The state of leadership ethics and the work that lies before us. Business Ethics: A European Review, 14, 323–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crane, A., Palazzo, G., Spence, L., & Matten, D. (2014). Contesting the value of ‘Creating shared value’. California Management Review, 56, 130–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahan, N., Doh, J., Oetzel, J., & Yaziji, M. (2010). Corporate-NGO collaboration: Co-creating new business models for developing markets. Long Range Planning, 43, 326–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, K. (1973). The case for and against business assumption of social responsibilities. Academy of Management Journal, 16, 312–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawkins, R. (1976). The selfish gene. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, R. (1980). Social dilemmas. Annual Review of Psychology, 31, 169–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denning, S. (2007). The secret language of leadership: How leaders inspire action through narrative. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doane, D. (2005). Beyond corporate social responsibility: Minnows, mammoths and markets. Futures, 37, 215–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dohrmann, S., Raith, M., & Siebold, N. (2015). Monetizing social value creation: A business model approach. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 5, 127–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20, 65–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Oxford: Capstone.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. (1962). Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, H. (1993). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gifford, R. (2011). The dragons of inaction: Psychological barriers that limit climate change mitigation and adaptation. American Psychologist, 66, 290–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, N., Griskevicius, V., & Cialdini, R. (2012). Reciprocity by proxy: Harnessing the power of obligation to foster cooperation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 441–473.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goleman, D. (2009). Ecological intelligence: How knowing the hidden impacts of what we buy can change everything. New York: Broadway Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottfredson, L. (1997). Mainstream science on intelligence (editorial). Intelligence, 24, 13–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grayson, D., McLaren, M., & Spitzeck, H. (2014). Social intrapreneurism and all that jazz—How business innovators are helping to build a more sustainable world. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griskevicius, V., Cantú, S., & van Vugt, M. (2012). The evolutionary bases for sustainable behavior: Implications for marketing, policy, and social entrepreneurship. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 31, 115–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halme, M., Lindeman, S., & Linna, P. (2012). Innovation for inclusive business: Intrapreneurial bricolage in multinational corporations. Journal of Management Studies, 49, 743–784.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laukkanen, M., & Patala, S. (2014). Analysing barriers to sustainable business model innovations: Innovation systems approach. International Journal of Innovation Management, 18, 1440010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loorbach, D. (2014). To transition! Governance panarchy in the new transformation. Rotterdam: Erasmus University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marques, J., & Mintzberg, H. (2015). Why corporate social responsibility isn’t a piece of cake. Sloan Management Review, 56, 7–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, G. (2015). Don’t even think about: Why our brains are wired to ignore climate change. New York: Bloomsbury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mateas, M., & Sengers, P. (1999). Narrative intelligence. Proceedings of the AAAI fall symposium on narrative intelligence (pp. 1–10). North Falmouth: AAAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moratis, L. (2014). The perversity of business case approaches towards CSR: Nuancing and extending the critique of Nijhof and Jeurissen. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 34, 654–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moratis, L. (2016). Connecting the dots: Towards integrated value. CSR Trend Report 2016. Antwerp: Antwerp Management School.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morsing, M., & Schultz, M. (2006). Corporate social responsibility communication: Stakeholder information, response and involvement strategies. Business Ethics: A European Review, 15, 323–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neisser, U., et al. (1996). Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns. American Psychologist, 51, 77–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pache, A., & Santos, F. (2010). When worlds collide: The internal dynamics of organizational responses to conflicting institutional demands. Academy of Management Review, 35, 455–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polonsky, M., Maignan, I., & Ferrell, O. (2005). A stakeholder model for implementing social responsibility in marketing. European Journal of Marketing, 39, 956–977.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M., & Kramer, M. (2011). Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review, 89, 62–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rohrbeck, R., Konnertz, L., & Knab, S. (2013). Collaborative business modelling for systemic and sustainability innovations. International Journal of Technology Management, 63, 4–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santos, F., Pache, A.-C., & Birkholz, C. (2015). Making hybrids work: Aligning business models and organizational design for social enterprises. California Management Review, 57, 36–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schaltegger, S., Lüdeke-Freund, F., & Hansen, E. (2011). Business cases for sustainability and the role of business model innovation: Developing a conceptual framework. Lüneberg: Centre for Sustainability Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scruton, R. (2012). How to think seriously about the planet: The case for an environmental conservatism. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seligman, L. (2006). Sensemaking throughout adoption and the innovation-decision process. European Journal of Innovation, 9, 108–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sennett, R. (2008). The craftsman. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. (1990). Invariants of human behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoknes, P. (2015). What we think about when we try not to think about global warming: Toward a new psychology of climate action. White River Junction: Chelsea Green Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stubbs, W., & Cocklin, C. (2008). Conceptualizing a ‘sustainability business model’. Organization & Environment, 21, 103–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SustainAbility. (2014). Model behaviour: 20 business models innovations for sustainability. London: SustainAbility.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. (2010). Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long Range Planning, 43, 172–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Varul, M. (2013). Towards a consumerist critique of capitalism: A socialist defence of consumer culture. Ephemera—Theory & Politics in Organization, 13, 293–315.

    Google Scholar 

  • Visser, W. (2011). The age of responsibility: CSR 2.0 and the new DNA of business. London: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Visser, W. (2014). Sustainable frontiers: Unlocking change through business, leadership and innovation. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, J., & Gooding, R. (1997). Equivocal information and attribution: An investigation of patterns of managerial sensemaking. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 275–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, F., & Post, J. (2013). Business model for people, planet (& profits): Exploring the phenomena of social business, a market-based approach to social value creation. Small Business Economics, 40, 715–737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yunus, M., Moingeon, B., & Lehmann-Ortega, L. (2010). Building social business models: Lessons from the Grameen experience. Long Range Planning, 43, 308–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zott, C., Amit, R., & Massa, L. (2011). The business model: Recent developments and future research. Journal of Management, 37, 1019–1042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. NHTV Breda University of Applied Sciences, Breda, The Netherlands

    Frans Melissen & Lars Moratis

  2. Antwerp Management School, Antwerp, Belgium

    Lars Moratis

Authors
  1. Frans Melissen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lars Moratis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lars Moratis .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Guildhall School of Business and Law, London Metropolitan University, London, United Kingdom

    Samuel O. Idowu

  2. School of Applied Social Studies, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, United Kingdom

    Stephen Vertigans

  3. Economics and Business Administration, University of Craiova, Craiova, Romania

    Adriana Schiopoiu Burlea

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Melissen, F., Moratis, L. (2017). Developing Fourth Generation Sustainability-Oriented Business Models: Towards Naïve, Native, and Narrative Intelligence. In: Idowu, S., Vertigans, S., Schiopoiu Burlea, A. (eds) Corporate Social Responsibility in Times of Crisis. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52839-7_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation