Organizationalcultureandthesuccess

ofcorporatesustainabilityinitiatives:
Anempiricalanalysisusing
theCompetingValuesFramework

LizAbbett,AnnaColdham,RyanWhisnant

A projectsubmittedinpartialfulfillmentoftherequirements
forthedegreeofMasterofScience(NaturalResourcesandEnvironment)
attheUniversityofMichigan

4/20/2010

FacultyAdvisors:
ProfessorKimS.Cameron
ProfessorAndrewJ.Hoffman

Abstract
Inresponsetothethreatsposedbyclimatechange,waterscarcityandotheremergingenvironmental
issues,corporationshaveprioritizedsustainabilityasacorebusinessissue.Manycompanieshave
learnedthatsustainabilityrepresentsadistinctcompetitiveopportunity,butnotallcompaniesare
successfullyaddressingtheseopportunitiesandchallenges.Areviewofexistingliteraturepointsto
organizationalcultureasanimportantdriverbehindthesuccessofsustainabilityinitiatives,yetlittle
empiricalresearchhasbeendonetodescribetherelationshipbetweencompanycultureand
sustainability.ThisstudyusestheCompetingValuesFramework(CVF)tounderstandtherelationship
betweencompanycultureandsustainabilityinitiativesuccessacross23companies.Thestudyfindsthat
culturedoesindeedmatterincorporatesustainabilitysuccessandpointstowardsadditionaldimensions
forcompaniestoconsiderwhenplanningandimplementingsuchinitiatives.

Acknowledgements
Wewouldliketothankthemanyindividualsandgroupsthathelpedmakethisresearchpossible.Our
facultyadvisors,KimCameronandAndyHoffmanguidedusfromstarttofinish,fromresearchdesign
andmethodologytoreviewingourfinalreport.Inaddition,KimsbookDiagnosingandChanging
OrganizationalCulture,coauthoredbyBobQuinn,wasaninvaluableresourceinframingand
interpretingourresearch.RossSchoolofBusinessfacultyScottDeRueandJaneDuttonprovideduswith
earlystageencouragementandfeedback.OurclientsWoodTurneratClimateCountsandKevinLoat
Qensoprovidedthepractitionersperspectivetoguideourresearchanddeliverables.Thelibrariansat
theKresgeBusinessAdministrationLibraryassisteduswithourliteraturereview.BradyWestatthe
UniversityofMichigansCenterforStatisticalConsultationandResearchandTrevorLeutscherat
DeterminantLLChelpedusstructureourdataandassistedwiththestatisticalanalysis.BehavioralData
Servicesassistedusduringtheinitialphasesofourproject.WearegratefultotheSchoolofNatural
ResourcesandEnvironmentandtheErbInstituteforprovidingthefundingtomakethisresearch
possible.

Wecouldnothaveaccomplishedthisresearchwithouttheparticipationofallthestudycompanies,and
wedeeplyappreciateourprimaryliaisonsateachcompanyandtheircolleagueswhocompletedthe
survey.Inaddition,wesincerelythankthefollowinggroupsandindividualswhosupportedourresearch
andconnectedustothestudycompanies:ExternalAdvisoryBoard(EAB)members,alumniandstudents
attheErbInstituteforGlobalSustainableEnterprise;KristaGulloattheSchoolofNaturalResourcesand
Environment;andJoshClevelandatNetImpact.ErbInstituteEABmemberStevePercywasparticularly
helpfulingeneratinginterestinourstudy.

Finally,wewouldliketothankourfriendsandfamiliesforsupportingoureffortsandsharinginour
excitementthroughoutthisprocess.

ii|P a g e


TableofContents
ExecutiveSummary.......................................................................................................................................1
IntroductionandLiteratureReview..............................................................................................................2
ScopeofLiteratureReview.......................................................................................................................2
EnvironmentalSustainabilityasaBusinessIssue.....................................................................................3
SustainabilityInitiativeswithinCorporations...........................................................................................4
OrganizationalCultureandCorporateEnvironmentalSustainability.......................................................4
ImpactofOrganizationalCultureonEffectiveness..................................................................................5
GapsinExistingResearch..........................................................................................................................6
ResearchQuestions......................................................................................................................................7
Hypothesis1:CulturalDifferencesbetweenCompanyandInitiative.................................................7
Hypothesis2:RoleofCollaborationinSustainabilityInitiatives.........................................................7
TheCompetingValuesFramework...............................................................................................................8
DataCollectionMethodology.....................................................................................................................11
KeyTerms................................................................................................................................................11
SurveyDesign:LeadSurvey....................................................................................................................12
SurveyDesign:TeamSurvey...................................................................................................................12
SelectingandEngagingStudyCompanies..............................................................................................16
SelectingTeamSurveyRespondents......................................................................................................17
SecondaryResearch................................................................................................................................17
Analysis.......................................................................................................................................................18
DataPreparation.....................................................................................................................................18
DatasetandStatisticalDesign.................................................................................................................18
StudyVariables.......................................................................................................................................19
StudySampleSize...................................................................................................................................20
Findings.......................................................................................................................................................21
DescriptionofStudyCompaniesandInitiatives.....................................................................................21
Hypothesis1:CulturalDifferencesbetweenCompanyCultureandInitiative.......................................23
ObservationalApproach.....................................................................................................................23
StatisticalApproach............................................................................................................................24
iii|P a g e

Hypothesis2:RoleofCollaborationinSustainabilityInitiatives............................................................26
ObservationalApproach.....................................................................................................................26
StatisticalApproach:...........................................................................................................................26
Discussion...................................................................................................................................................29
InterpretationofFindings.......................................................................................................................29
PrescriptiveGuidanceforPractitioners..................................................................................................33
TraditionalApproachtoInitiativePlanningandImplementation......................................................33
ConsideringCompanyCultureinInitiativeDesignandImplementation...........................................34
BenefitsofCounterCultureInitiatives...............................................................................................37
AreasforFutureResearch......................................................................................................................37
SummaryandConclusion...........................................................................................................................38
WorksCited.................................................................................................................................................39
Appendices..................................................................................................................................................44
AppendixA:SampleLeadSurvey............................................................................................................44
AppendixB:SampleTeamSurvey..........................................................................................................49
AppendixC:CompanyEngagementMaterials.......................................................................................57
ProjectMarketing...............................................................................................................................57
SampleSolicitationLetter...................................................................................................................58
SampleLeadSurveyEmail..................................................................................................................59
SampleTeamSurveyEmail.................................................................................................................60
AppendixD:OverviewofParticipatingCompanies................................................................................61
AppendixE:StudyDatabase...................................................................................................................62
AppendixF:DataDictionaryforVariablesUsedinAnalysis...................................................................63

iv|P a g e

Figure1:SchematicoftheCompetingValuesFramework...........................................................................8
Figure2:DescriptionofCVFCultureTypes..................................................................................................9
Figure3:SampleCompanyCultureProfile.................................................................................................13
Figure4:SampleCompanyCultureQuestionontheTeamSurvey............................................................13
Figure5:SampleSustainabilityInitiativeQuestionontheTeamSurvey...................................................14
Figure6:CompanyEngagementProcess....................................................................................................16
Figure7:CorrelationsbetweenDependentVariables................................................................................19
Figure8:DistributionofDominantCVFQuadrantacrossStudyCompanies.............................................21
Figure9:DistributionofCVFProfileShapeacrossStudyCompanies.........................................................21
Figure10:DistributionofDominantCVFQuadrantacrossStudyInitiatives..............................................21
Figure11:ComparisonofDominantQuadrantsbetweenCompanyCultureandInitiative......................22
Figure12:DistributionofDominantQuadrantsacrossMoreandLessSuccessfulInitiatives...................22
Figure13:ComparisonofDominantQuadrantsbetweenCompanyCultureandInitiativeforMoreand
LessSuccessfulInitiatives..............................................................................................................22
Figure14:SampleCompanyProfile1.........................................................................................................23
Figure15:CorrelationMatrixforPerceivedInitiativeSuccessvs.Congruence.........................................24
Figure16:ModelParametersforHypothesis1..........................................................................................24
Figure17:EstimatedFixedEffectsandStandardErrorsforHypothesis1.................................................25
Figure18:OddsRatioandConfidenceIntervalforHypothesis1...............................................................25
Figure19:SampleCompanyProfile2........................................................................................................26
Figure20:CorrelationbetweenPerceivedSuccessandCongruenceintheCollaborateQuadrant..........27
Figure21:ModelParametersforHypothesis2..........................................................................................27
Figure22:EstimatedFixedEffectsandStandardErrorsforHypothesis2.................................................28
Figure23:OddsRatioandConfidenceIntervalforHypothesis2...............................................................28
Figure24:SampleCompanyProfile3.........................................................................................................30
Figure25:CompanyProfileforaProfessionalServicesFirm.....................................................................31
Figure26:ProfileofInitiativeRespondingtoRegulatoryMandate..........................................................31
Figure27:ProfileofaCompanywithMoreSuccessfulInitiativeinCreateQuadrant...............................32
Figure29:MatchingYourInitiativetoYourOrganizationalCulture...........................................................35
Figure28:IncorporatingCultureintoInitiativePlanningandImplementation.........................................35

v|P a g e

ExecutiveSummary
Underthethreatsofclimatechange,waterscarcity,andotheremergingenvironmentalconcerns,
corporatesustainabilityhasemergedasacorebusinessissue.Movingbeyondregulatorycompliance,
manycompanieshavelearnedthatenvironmentalsustainabilityoffersdistinctcompetitive
opportunities,improvedefficiency,andaccesstonewmarkets.Whilesomecompaniesaresuccessfully
addressingthesechallengesandopportunities,othersstruggletoadoptthesechanges.Areviewof
existingliteraturepointstocompanycultureasacriticalfactorforthesuccessofsustainability
initiatives,yetlittleempiricalresearchhasbeendonetodescribetherelationshipbetweencorporate
cultureandsustainability.Thepurposeofthisstudyistounderstand(1)therelationshipbetween
companycultureandthesuccessofitssustainabilityinitiatives,and(2)therolethatcollaborationplays
inthesuccessofsustainabilityinitiatives.

TheCompetingValuesFramework(CVF),nowwidelyadoptedbybothresearchersandpractitioners,
wasusedtobetterunderstandtherelationshipbetweencompanycultureandsustainabilityinitiative
success.Datawasgatheredfrom23companiesacrossmultipleindustriesusingtheOrganizationCulture
AssessmentInstrument(OCAI),adiagnostictoolrootedintheCVF,andwassupplementedbysecondary
companyresearch.Thestudyuseshierarchicallinearandnonlinearmodeling(HLM)toanalyzethedata
acrossasamplesizeof490employeeassessmentsofcompanysustainabilityinitiatives.

Thestudyfindsthatthereisanempiricalrelationshipbetweencompanycultureandthesuccessofits
sustainabilityinitiatives:ifthereisgreatersimilaritybetweencompanycultureandthesustainability
initiative,theinitiativewillbemoresuccessful.Thisfindingpointstothefactthatculturedoesindeed
matterincorporatesustainabilityandvalidatesthegrowinginterestincompanyculture.Thestudyalso
findsthatitisparticularlyimportantforthecompanycultureandinitiativetomatchinthelevelof
collaborationthateachdemands.

Overall,thesefindingssuggestthatthereareadditionaldimensionsforcompaniestoconsiderwhen
designingandimplementingsustainabilityinitiativesthatarenotcurrentlyapartofthetraditional
corporateparadigm.Itisimportantforcompaniestounderstandtheircultureandplansustainability
initiativesthatareconsistentwiththatculture.Companycultureisdifficulttochangeandtypically
developsoveralongperiodoftime;therefore,companiesmustthinkcriticallyabouthowtheyare
designingtheirinitiatives.Inthelongrun,managerscanseektogrowcultureandsustainability
initiativestogether.

Thestudyalsopointstoareasforfutureresearchrelatingtocultureandthesuccessofsustainability
initiatives.Forexample,theimpactofotherfactorssuchasinternalfinancialincentivesandindustry
attributesmayreducetheeffectsofculture.Additionally,furtherresearchshouldbedonetobetter
understandwhethercertaintypesofcompanyculturesleadtomoresuccessfulsustainabilityinitiatives.

1|P a g e

IntroductionandLiteratureReview
Inthepastdecade,corporatesustainabilityhasmigratedfromaperipheralconcerntoacorebusiness
issue.Astheglobalpopulationgrowsanddemandforgoodsandservicesincreases,companiesare
challengedtoefficientlyusethefinitebaseofnaturalresourcesontheplanet.Underthethreatsof
climatechange,waterscarcityandotheremergingenvironmentalissues,companiesmustalsoprepare
tocomplywithnewregulations.Manycompaniesaresuccessfullyaddressingthesechallengesand
reducingtheirenvironmentalimpactthroughavarietyofonthegroundinitiatives.However,other
companieshavebeenstrugglingtomoveinamoresustainabledirection.Evenwithinasinglecompany,
somesustainabilityinitiativesmaybesuccessfulwhileothersfailtoachievethedesiredresults.
Areviewofexistingliteraturepointstocompanycultureasacriticalfactorforthesuccessof
sustainabilityinitiatives,yetlittleempiricalresearchhasbeendonetodescribetherelationshipbetween
companycultureandsustainability.Thepurposeofthisstudyistogenerateempiricallygrounded
insightsontherelationshipbetweencompanycultureandtheeffectivenessofcorporatesustainability
initiatives.

ScopeofLiteratureReview
Thestudyofcorporateeffortstominimizeenvironmentalimpactisarelativelynewfield,and
accordingly,thespecifictermsusedtodescribethesetypesofinitiativesarestilldevelopingandvary
acrosstheexistingliterature.Inthe1970s,thetermcorporatesocialresponsibilitystartedgaininginuse.
Twodecadeslater,environmentalmanagementandcorporatesustainabilityemergedasfrequently
usedtermstodescribecorporateenvironmentalinitiatives(Montiel,2008).Inthefollowingliterature
review,weciteexistingresearchthatusesthesethreetermsandassumethatallthreearerelevantfor
providingbackgroundforthisstudy.

Althoughcorporatesocialresponsibility(CSR),sustainability,andenvironmentalmanagementcanall
refertoattemptstoreduceacompanysecologicalfootprint,eachtermconveysaslightlydifferent
meaning.Carrollsoftenciteddefinitionofcorporatesocialresponsibilityencompassestheeconomic,
legal,ethical,anddiscretionaryexpectationsthatsocietyhasoforganizationsatagivenpointintime
(1979).Sustainabilityasaconcepthasbeengaininginusesince1987,whentheWorldCommissionon
EnvironmentandDevelopmentdefinedsustainabledevelopmentasdevelopmentthatmeetsthe
needsofthepresentwithoutcompromisingtheabilityoffuturegenerationstomeettheirownneeds.
Accordingly,corporatesustainabilitymaybedefinedastheadoptionofbusinessstrategiesand
activitiesthatmeettheneedsoftheenterpriseanditsstakeholderstodaywhileprotecting,sustaining
andenhancingthehumanandnaturalresourcesthatwillbeneededinthefuture(IISDetal.,1992).
However,theexactinterpretationvaries.Sometimescorporatesustainabilityisusedasawayto
approachCSR,sometimesitisusedtorefertosimultaneouslymeetingeconomic,socialand
environmentalneeds,andsometimesitisusedtofocusprimarilyonenvironmentalissuesandis
synonymouswithenvironmentalmanagement(Montiel,2008).Whilesocialissuessuchashumanrights
andtransparencyarecriticalbusinessissuesandareoftenincludedintheconceptofcorporate
sustainability,ourfocusisoncorporateenvironmentalsustainabilityinitiatives,definedasanyeffort
madetoreduceacompanysenvironmentalimpact(seeMethodologysectionforfurtherdiscussion).

Similarly,existingliteraturediscussestherelationshipbetweensustainabilityandavarietyof
organizationaltopicsincludingleadership,citizenship,humanresourcesmanagement,andemployee
empowerment.Thesestudies,inadditiontothosethatdirectlyaddressculture,havealsobeenincluded
inouranalysisinordertounderstandthecurrentstateofresearchattheintersectionoforganizational
andenvironmentalissueswithincorporations.

2|P a g e

EnvironmentalSustainabilityasaBusinessIssue
Startingin1970withtheformationoftheEnvironmentalProtectionAgency(EPA)andsubsequent
legislationsuchastheCleanAirActandCleanWaterAct,U.S.companieshavebeencompelledtofocus
onprescript,compliancebasedstandards.Incertaincases,thisapproachhasevolvedintoamore
strategicstancetowardsenvironmentalprotection.CarrierCorporation,forexample,eliminateditsuse
oftoxicsolventstocleanpartsinthemanufacturingofitsairconditioners.Whilethismayhavesatisfied
regulatoryrequirements,bytheendofoneyearitresultedin$1.2millioninreducedmanufacturing
costs(Hoffman,2000).Manycompanieshavelearnedthatsustainabilityrepresentsadistinct
competitiveopportunity.

Significantdriversofcorporateenvironmentalsustainabilityincludepotentialcostsavingsfromeco
efficiencyinitiatives,newrevenueopportunities,improvedreputation,talentattractionandretention,
andreducedrisksduetoemissionsregulationsaddressingclimatechange(Enkvist,2007;Hoffman,
1999;Baumgartner,2009).EnvironmentalDefenseFund,throughtheirinternprogramthatequips
MBAstoidentifyecoefficiencyinitiatives,hassaved$89millioninnetoperationalcostsfordozensof
majorcorporations(EnvironmentalDefenseFund,2010).Asconcernsoverclimatechange,supplychain
security,andavailabilityofenergyandwatercontinuetogrow,thethreatofregulationsmandating
changesincorporateaccountingsystemsandresourceusearemotivatingaction.TheUnitedKingdoms
mandatoryCarbonReductionCommitmentemissionstradingschemerequiresallorganizationsusing
morethan6,000MWhperyearofelectricitytopurchaseandsubmitsufficientallowancestomeettheir
annualemissionsneeds(CarbonTrust,2010).AccordingtoTheClimateGroup,climatelegislationinthe
EuropeanUnionhasresultedin,amongothersthings,increasedelectricitypricescausedbythepass
throughofcarboncosts(Kenber,HaugenandCobb,2009).SimilarlegislationwaspassedbytheU.S.
HouseofRepresentativesinJune2009,andasofthiswritinglegislationisbeingconsideredintheU.S.
Senate.

Inresponsetotheseconcerns,therehasbeenarecentproliferationofsustainabilityindices,reporting
standards,andprinciplestobringlegitimacytocorporatesustainabilityprograms.Investorsaredriving
manyoftheseindustrywideinitiatives,includinggreenhousegasemissionsassessmentandreporting
(e.g.,GlobalReportingInitiative,GreenhouseGasProtocol,climatecounts.org),environmental
managementprotocols(e.g.,ISO14001),responsibleinvestment(e.g.,DowJonesSustainabilityIndexes,
CalvertSRIcriteria,FTSE4Good,Ceres),andglobalsocialresponsibilityandcorporategovernance(e.g.,
InternationalChamberofCommerceCorporateGovernance,OECDPrinciplesofCorporateGovernance,
SullivanPrinciples).

Clearly,environmentaldecisionmakingisbecominglessanicheperipheralissueandmoreacore
businessissue(Orlitzky,Schmidt,andRynes,2003;Walsh,WeberandMargolis,2003;Hoffman,1999).
AccordingtotheInterfaithCenteronCorporateResponsibility,therewere360shareholderresolutions
filedrelatedtoclimateriskin2009(GreenBizExecutiveNetwork,2009).AsofApril2009,morethan80
percentofcompaniessurveyedidentifiedthemselvesasadvocatesorleaderswhoconsider
sustainabilityacorecomponentoftheircompanysvalueproposition(GreenBizExecutiveNetwork,
2009).Asearlyas2007,57percentofexecutivessurveyedindicatedthatimprovingtheenvironmental
footprintofexistingproducts/serviceswasatminimumamajorpriority(EconomistIntelligenceUnit,
2010).Hoffmanconcludesthatbusinessmanagersareatastrategicdisadvantageiftheytreat
environmentalandbusinessissuesasseparate,andthisisanareawhereacademicresearchcan
contribute(2005).

3|P a g e

SustainabilityInitiativeswithinCorporations
Duetotheexternalforcesnotedabove,therehavebeenavarietyofsustainabilityinitiatives
undertakenbycompaniesandanincreaseinassessmentofcorporateenvironmentalperformance.
Commoncorporatesustainabilityinitiativesincludereductionsintravel,facilitiesretrofits,renewable
energygeneration,wastereduction,waterconservation,anddevelopmentanduseofecofriendly
productsandbusinesspractices(VaultGuidetoGreenPrograms,2009).Dependingonthecompany,
thesesustainabilityrelatedinitiativescanbepromptedbyacombinationoforganizationalvaluesand
traditionalbusinessdrivers.Inadditiontostatingthattheywanttobegoodcorporatecitizens,
companiesreportthattheirmotivationsforundertakingsustainabilityinitiativesincludecomplyingwith
lawsandregulations,cuttingcosts,meetingdemandsofcustomers,discoveringnewmarkets,and
supportingrecruitmentandretentionofemployees(EconomistIntelligenceUnit,2010).Inthesecases,
selectionofasustainabilityinitiativedependsonthesamecriteriaascompetinginvestmentswithinthe
business.Typicalcriteriaincludepaybackperiod,returnoninvestment(ROI),andnetpresentvalue
(NPV).TheEnvironmentalDefenseFund,forinstance,promotestheuseofNPVinevaluationofenergy
efficiencyprojectswithitscorporatepartners(Harris,ChuBaird,andCrystal,2008).Thereisnostandard
protocolforidentifyingtheappropriatesustainabilityinitiativeswithinacompany;popularsustainability
literaturecitesseveralframeworksthatmaybeused,suchasSWOT(strength,weakness,opportunity,
threat)analysesandWerbachsrecentlydevelopedSTaRframework,whichseekstoexploitchangesin
society,technology,andresources(2009).Regardlessofwhichframeworkisused,companiesareurged
topursueinitiativesthatarealignedwiththeircorebusinessstrategy(Werbach,2009).Nikeoffersan
examplewithitsReuseAShoerecyclingprogram.Theprogramtakesusedshoesandrecyclesthe
materialstomakeotherproductsincludingnewshoesandathleticsurfaces(Nike,Inc.,2010).
Companiesarealsotakingadvantageofnewproductdevelopmentopportunities.Cloroxenteredthe
greencleaningmarketwithitsGreenWorkslineofproducts.AccordingtoClorox,thenewproductsseek
toofferpowerfulcleaningdonenaturally,andthecompanyclaimstohavethetopbrandinnatural
cleaning(TheCloroxCompany,2010).

OrganizationalCultureandCorporateEnvironmentalSustainability
Existingliteraturehaspositedthatorganizationalcultureandcorporateenvironmentalsustainabilityare
closelyrelated,withweaknessesinbusinessculturebeingblamedforimpedingenvironmentalprogress
(Klassen,2000).Numerousstudieshavealsofoundthecurrentstructureofcorporationsmaylimitthe
successofsustainabilityinitiativesbypreventingtransmissionofenvironmentalinformation,by
obstructingstakeholderparticipation,andbyinhibitingchangeefforts(SharmaandVredenburg,1998;
HuntandAuster,1990;StarikandRands,1995;Polonsky,ZeffaneandMedley,1992).Companieswitha
strongemphasisoncommandandcontroloftenstruggletoadoptinnovationsthataretypicallyrequired
tocreateandthenintegratesustainabilityinitiatives(Hutchinson,1996;Maxwelletal.,1997).Thisisnot
surprising,asmanagerialresistancetoanychangeisoftenfoundthroughoutorganizations.Sincethe
currentsystemenabledthesuccessofthesemanagers,theyhaveastakeinpreservingthestatusquo,a
phenomenondescribedbySchn(1971)asthedynamicconservatismofsocialsystems(Griffithsand
Petrick,2001).

Muchasweaknessesinculturecaninhibitsustainabilityinitiativesfromtakingroot,strengthsinculture
cansupporttheseinitiatives.Forexample,organizationsthatsupportemployeeinvolvementin
environmentaleffortshavedemonstratedgreatersuccessinreducingthecompanysenvironmental
impact(RamusandSteger,2000).KleineandvonHauffdrawaparallelbetweenTotalQuality
Management(TQM)andCSR,statingthatbothoftheseorganizationalinnovationsmustbeintegrated
throughoutacompanyatallmanagementlevels(2009).
4|P a g e


Thereasonsbehindthiscloserelationshipbetweenenvironmentalmanagementandcompanyculture
havemuchtodowiththenatureofenvironmentalissues.Suchissuesspananentirecompany,making
itdifficulttoisolatethemunderthepurviewofasingledepartmentordivision(Hoffman,1999;Hart,
1995;StarikandRands,1995).Anexampleofsuchanissueisenergyefficiency,whichisbecoming
increasinglyattractiveasenergypricesincreaseandpressuretomitigateclimatechangemounts.To
identifythemostpromisingopportunitiesforenergyefficiency,acrossfunctionalteamisneeded:
Facilitiesmanagerscanupgradecorporateofficebuildings.Operationsmanagerscanidentifywasted
energyinmanufacturingandthesupplychain.ITmanagerscanimplementdatacenterbestpractices.
Oncetheseopportunitiesareidentifiedacrossthefirm,financialmanagerscanprioritizethembasedon
ROIorothermeasures.

Inadditiontotheircrossfunctionalnature,environmentalissuesarecomplexandoftenrequire
informalandpreventativeactionsbymanyindividuals(Boiral,2005;Florida,1996;Hanna,Newman,and
Johnson,2000).Tocontinuetheenergyefficiencyexample,asourceoftremendoussavingsisoften
foundinseeminglysmallbehavioralchanges,suchasturningoffcomputersandmonitorsattheendof
theday.Thesetypesofvoluntaryactions,sometimescalledorganizationalcitizenshipbehaviors,arenot
includedinformaljobdescriptionsorincentivestructures.Todrivevoluntaryenvironmentalactions,
implicitculturalfactorscanplayasubstantialrole(Boiral,2009).

Byconsideringanddevelopingorganizationalcultureaspartofcorporatesustainabilityefforts,
companiesareabletobetterintegratethesesustainabilityrelatedinitiativesintodailybusiness
activities(Baumgartner,2009).Fittingsustainabilitystrategiesandactivitiestotheorganizationalculture
alsoreducestheriskofthecompanymisrepresentingitsenvironmentalperformanceandbeing
perceivedasinauthentic;thatis,theriskofgreenwashingisreduced(Baumgartner,2009).

ImpactofOrganizationalCultureonEffectiveness
Theimportanceoforganizationalculturetothesuccessofsustainabilityinitiativesisnotsurprising,
sinceorganizationalculturehaspreviouslybeenlinkedtothelongtermfinancialsuccessandimproved
effectivenessoforganizations(CameronandEttingson,1988;Denison,1990).Astrong,distinctive
organizationalculturehasbeenidentifiedasoneofthekeycomponentsofasuccessfulcompany(Trice
andBeyer,1993).Whenallleaders,managersandstaffwithinanorganizationhaveaclearsenseof
theirsharedculture,itcreatessocialorder,continuity,collectiveidentity,commitment,andcommon
visionwhilereducingorganizationaluncertaintiesallofwhichallleadtoimprovedorganizational
performance(CameronandQuinn,2006).

Organizationalculturehasbeendefinedinmanyways,butWilson(2001)offersasynthesisoffour
commoncharacteristics:First,organizationalcultureconsistsofsharedassumptions,valuesand
behaviors.Second,onlysomeaspectsofculturecanbeobservedoraccuratelyarticulatedbygroup
members.Third,newmemberstoanorganizationadoptitscultureastheproperwaytothink,feeland
behave.Fourth,sincenewmembersareassimilatedintotheexistingculture,thecultureisveryslowto
changeandwillpersistovertime.

Duetoitspersistence,culturehasbeenshowntoplayaparticularlystrongroleinorganizationalchange
initiatives.Inastudyinvestigatingorganizationalchangeinitiativesrangingfromstrategicplanningto
downsizingtoqualityimprovements,themostcommonlyidentifieddriveroffailurewasignoring

5|P a g e

culturalissuesacompellingcase,giventhatuptothreequartersoforganizationalchangeinitiatives
fail(Cameron,1997).

Theimportanceofunderstandingorganizationalcultureisalsodemonstratedthroughthecongruence
hypothesis,whichstatesthatindividualsaremoreeffectivewhentheirpersonalcompetenciesalign
withtheculturesoftheorganizationsinwhichtheywork.Manyresearchershavehypothesizedthat
havingleaderswithindividualcompetenciesthatalignwiththeirorganizationalculturesincreases
productivitywhilereducingconflict(Fiedler,1977;Hersey,BlanchardandJohnson,1977).

Researchonorganizationalcultureisoftenconductedthroughindepthcasestudiesofsingle
organizations,usingmethodssuchasbehavioralobservationsandinterviews(Schein,1985;Wilkins,
1983).Inadditiontothisabundanceofqualitativecasestudies,toolshavebeendevelopedto
quantitativelylinkorganizationalculturetoconventionalbusinessmetrics.DenisonandMishra(1995)
foundthatfourculturaltraits,similartothoseusedintheCompetingValuesFrameworkdescribed
below,arepredictiveoforganizationaleffectivenessasmeasuredthroughreturnonassetsandsales
growth.Theirresearchalsospecificallystatesthatbothqualitativecasestudiesaswellasquantitative
comparisonsprovideusefulinsightinthefieldoforganizationalcultureresearch.

GapsinExistingResearch
Althoughmanyacademicsandpractitionershavepostulatedthatthereisarelationshipbetween
corporatecultureandsustainability,littleresearchhassimultaneouslyinvestigatedcorporate
organizationalissuesandenvironmentalissues.Often,modelsfoundinsustainabilityliteraturefocuson
developingsoundstrategiesbutpayscantattentiontothehumancapitalfactors,suchasculture,that
areneededtodeploysuchstrategies.Similarly,theorganizationalliteraturedoesnottiehumancapital
tospecificrecommendationsforcreatingorganizationsthatcaneffectivelyaddressthecrosscutting,
complexnatureofenvironmentalissues(DunphyandGriffiths,2000;Hoffman,2000;Bhat,1996).

Despitegeneralconsensusthatcompanycultureandsustainabilitysuccesshaveastrongrelationship,
thereisalackofstudiesusingempiricalevidencetodescribethenatureofthisrelationship.Many
scholarshavedevelopedtheoreticalframeworksandmodelstodescribethisrelationship,butitis
importanttosubstantiatetheseframeworkswithempiricalevidence(RamusandSteger,2000;Gladwin,
1993).Inastudyexaminingtherelationshipbetweenorganizationalcitizenshipbehaviorsandcorporate
sustainability,Boiral(2008)notesthatcasestudiesformthebulkofexistingresearchonemployee
mobilization.Meanwhile,quantitativestudiesthatfocusonenvironmentalsustainabilityoftenmeasure
theenvironmentalimpactofspecificbehaviorsandactionsratherthantheorganizationaldimensionsof
corporateenvironmentalsustainability(Boiral,2008).Ultimately,tounderstandtherelationship
betweenorganizationalcultureandcorporateenvironmentalinitiatives,studiesthatapplyboth
quantitativeandqualitativemethodsareneeded(Fernandez,Junquera,andOrdiz,2003).Weseekto
addressthisresearchgapbyusingquantitativemethodstoexpanduponexistingtheoriesand
qualitativeresearch.

Insummary,currentthoughtleadershippointstoorganizationalcultureasanimportantfactorinthe
successofeffortstoreducethecompanysenvironmentalimpactbuthasbeenunderresearchedto
date.Whatlittleresearchonorganizationalstudiesandsustainabilityexistshasbeenlargelybasedon
casestudiesortheoreticalframeworksratherthanonempiricalevidence.Applyingapractical,
quantitativeframeworktotheissueofcorporatesustainabilitywouldcontributevaluableinsightto
complementthisexistingbodyofknowledge.
6|P a g e

ResearchQuestions
Hypothesis1:CulturalDifferencesbetweenCompanyandInitiative
Greatersimilaritybetweencompanycultureandasustainabilityinitiativeleadstogreatersuccessofthe
initiative.

Existingevidence
Organizationalcultureisapredictoroforganizationaleffectiveness.
Organizationalcultureisasanimportantconsiderationforsuccessfulimplementationof
corporatesustainabilityinitiatives.
Leadershipcompetenciesthataresimilartothecultureoftheorganizationsaremoreeffective
thanleadershipcompetenciesthataredissimilartothecultureoftheorganization.

Therefore,wehypothesizethatsustainabilityinitiativeswithculturalcharacteristicssimilartothe
organizationsculturewillbemoreeasilyadoptedandconsequentlymoresuccessfulthansustainability
initiativesthataredissimilartotheorganizationsculture.

Hypothesis2:RoleofCollaborationinSustainabilityInitiatives
Greatersimilaritybetweenthecompanysemphasisoncollaborationandtheinitiativesemphasison
collaborationleadstogreatersuccessoftheinitiative.

Existingevidence
Organizationalculturesetsexpectationsandnorms.
Individualsaremosteffectivewhentheybehaveinawaythatisconsistentwithculture.
Collaborationisparticularlyimportantbecausemostsustainabilityinitiativesarecross
functionalandrelyonvoluntaryactionsthatcannotbeenforcedthroughtraditionalcorporate
structures.

Therefore,wehypothesizethatsustainabilityinitiativesthatcloselymatchtheorganizationslevelof
emphasisoncollaborationwillbemoresuccessfulthansustainabilityinitiativesthatdonotmatchthe
organizationstendencytocollaborate.

7|P a g e

TheCompetingValuesFramework
Asoutlinedintheresearchquestionsabove,thisstudyseekstouseempiricalmetricstobetter
understandtherelationshipbetweencompanycultureandtheefficacyofenvironmentalsustainability
initiatives.Althoughorganizationalcultureisoftenperceivedassubjective,academicshavedeveloped
methodstomeasureculturesothattheycanbecomparedacrossorganizationsandcorrelatedwith
organizationalperformance(DenisonandMishra,1995).Toinvestigatethisquestion,wesoughtto
applyavettedframeworkthathasbeenwidelyadoptedbybothresearchersandpractitioners.The
CompetingValuesFramework(CVF)providesameansofquantifyingcultureandhasastrongandwell
establishedempiricalbasisforculturaldiagnosis.

TheCVFservesasasensemakingdevicetohelpleaders,managers,andemployeesunderstandand
navigatetheinherentculturaltension,orcompetingvalues,withintheirorganization.Theframework
isbasedonthenotionthatallhumanactivityhasanunderlyingstructure.Organizations,bydefinition,
exhibitpatternsandpredictabilityinrelationshipsandtheCVFservestoidentifydimensionstothese
relationships.Studyoforganizationaleffectivenesshasrevealedtwoprimarydimensionsusedinthe
CVF:flexibilityvs.stabilityandefficientinternalprocessvs.competitiveexternalpositioning(Cameron,
Quinn,DeGraff,andThakor,2006).Orientingthesetwodimensionsonhorizontalandverticalaxes
revealsatwobytwomatrixwithfourquadrants,knownintheCVFasControl,Compete,Create,and
Collaborate1.Eachquadrantrepresentsadistinctclusterofcriteriarelatingtothewaypeopleprocess
information,learnabouttheirenvironment,organizeandleadothers,createvalueforcustomers,and
howtheyseewhatisright,good,orappropriate.

Figure1:SchematicoftheCompetingValuesFramework

Specifically,thelowerleftquadrant(Control)relatestovalueenhancingactivitiesincluding
improvementsinefficiencybyimplementingbetterprocesses.Thelowerrightquadrant(Compete)
relatestovalueenhancingactivitiesincludingbeingaggressiveandforcefulinthepursuitof
competitiveness.Theupperrightquadrant(Create)relatestovalueenhancingactivitiesthatdealwith

ThesetermsareoftenusedtodescribetheCVFquadrantstopractitioners.Inacademicliteratureandelsewhere,
theseculturalquadrantsarealsoknownasHierarchy,Market,Adhocracy,andClan,respectively.Thesesetsof
termsareequivalent,buttomaintainconsistency,weuseControl,Compete,Create,andCollaborateinthispaper.

8|P a g e

innovationintheproductsandservicesanorganizationproduces.Theupperleftquadrant(Collaborate)
relatestovalueenhancingactivitiesthatdealwithbuildinghumancompetencies,developingpeople,
andsolidifyinganorganizationalculture.Activitiesineachofthesequadrantscreatevalueindifferent
ways,andthiscansometimesbeasourceoftension.Understandingthedegreeofemphasisineach
quadrantwithinanorganizationorfunctioncanbeachievedbymappingthepercentageofhumanand
financialresourcesdedicatedtoeachareaonthetwobytwomatrix,creatingaresourcemap.These
mapscanthenbeusedtounderstandattributessuchasthedominantcultureofanorganization,the
levelofopposingtensionorbalancebetweenvalues,orthecongruencebetweentheorganizationand
itsleadershiporinitiatives.Understandingtheseattributesandrelationshipscanhelpguide
organizationstomakemoreeffectivechoicesintheiractivities.

Figure2:DescriptionofCVFCultureTypes(CameronandQuinn,2006)
The
Collaborate
(Clan)
Culture:

"A very friendly place to work where people share a lot of themselves. It is like an extended family.
The leaders, or head of the organization, are considered to be mentors and, maybe even, parent
figures. The organization is held together by loyalty or tradition. Commitment is high. The
organization emphasizes the long-term benefit of human resource development and attaches great
importance to cohesion and morale. Success is defined in terms of sensitivity to customers and
concern for people. The organization places a premium on teamwork, participation, and
consensus."

The Create
(Adhocracy)
Culture:

"A dynamic, entrepreneurial, and creative place to work. People stick their necks out and take
risks. The leaders are considered to be innovators and risk takers. The glue that holds the
organization together is commitment to experimentation and innovation. The emphasis is on being
on the leading edge. The organization's long-term emphasis is on growth and acquiring new
resources. Success means gaining unique and new products to services. Being a product or
service leader is important. The organization encourages individual initiative and freedom."

The Compete "A results-oriented organization. The major concern is getting the job done. People are competitive
and goal-oriented. The leaders are hard drivers, producers, and competitors. They are tough and
(Market)
demanding. The glue that holds the organization together is an emphasis on winning. Reputation
Culture:
and success are common concerns. The long-term focus is on competitive actions and
achievement of measurable goals and targets. Success is defined in terms of market share and
penetration. Competitive pricing and market leadership are important. The organizational style is
hard-driving competitiveness."
The Control
(Hierarchy)
Culture:

"A very formalized and structured place to work. Procedures govern what people do. The leaders
pride themselves on being good coordinators and organizers, who are efficiency-minded.
Maintaining a smooth-running organization is most critical. Formal rules and policies hold the
organization is most critical. Formal rules and policies hold the organization together. The longterm concern is on stability and performance with efficient, smooth operations. Success is defined
in terms of dependable delivery, smooth scheduling, and low cost. The management of employees
is concerned with secure employment and predictability."

TheCVFhasbeenusedasatooltoassesstheexistinganddesiredculturewithinorganizationsand
evaluatewhetherculturechangehasactuallybeenachieved.HooijbergandPetrock(1993)foundthat
theCVFwasoneofthebestorganizationalmodelsavailabletohelporganizationsplanandmanage
majorchange.Kalliath,Bluedorn,andGillespie(1999)reportedthattheCVFhasbeenappliedinawide
rangeoforganizationalresearchandfoundthatitisavaluabletoolformakingsenseoftheoften
confusingorganizationaleffectivenesstopic."Theirapplicationofstructuralequationsmodelingtotest
theCVFfoundthattheCVFcriteriayieldedexcellentvalidityandreliabilityestimates.

TheCVFhasbeenusedformorethantwentyyearsinavarietyofgeographiesandindustries.Inasearch
ofliteraturefrom2000topresent,theCVFwasapplied44timesinjournalsacrossapplicationsas
diverseashospitals,performancereview,TQM/SixSigma,construction,virtualwork,livestock
production,engineering,realestate,nursinghomes,highereducation,orchestras,andhospitality.
9|P a g e

ShepstoneandCurrie(2006),forexample,usetheCVFtodemonstratethatcultureplaysacriticalrolein
theeffectivenessoflibrarystaffandconcludethattheCVFresultedinacomplex,multidimensional
understandingoforganizationaleffectiveness.FurtherdescriptionofspecificapplicationsoftheCVFcan
befoundinCameron,Quinn,DeGraff,andThakor(2006)andCameronandQuinn(2006).

TheCVFisoneofmanyframeworksthathavebeendevelopedtohelporganizationsunderstandtheir
cultureanditsimpactontheirsuccess.Specifictocultureandenvironmentalsustainability,Blum
KustererandHussain(2001)pointoutthatseveralframeworkshavebeendevelopedthatattemptto
explainhoworganizationsreacttoenvironmentalpressures.However,theseframeworksare
insufficientinprovidingarobustempiricaltreatmentoforganizationalcultureasitrelatesto
sustainability.Likewise,theexistingframeworksdonotdrawadirectrelationshipbetweenan
organizationscultureandthesuccessofitssustainabilityinitiatives.Forinstance,Maon,Lindgreen,and
Swaen(2008)introducedanintegrativeframeworkforCSRfocusedondesignandimplementation
models,buttheframeworkdoesnotprovideanexplicitconnectionbetweencultureandtheefficacyof
implementinginitiatives.TheCVF,however,providesawellvettedtoolforunderstandingthe
relationshipbetweenorganizationalcultureandthesuccessofenvironmentalsustainabilityinitiatives.

10|P a g e

DataCollectionMethodology
Ourmethodologyisbasedonanestablishedtool,theOrganizationCultureAssessmentInstrument
(OCAI),whichisrootedintheCVF(CameronandQuinn,2006).Datawascollectedthroughanonline
surveyandsupplementedwithsecondaryresearchandinterviewswithparticipatingcompanies.The
followingsectiondefineskeytermsusedintheanalysisanddescribesthemethodologyappliedto
designtheonlinesurveysandengagestudyparticipants.

KeyTerms
Asdemonstratedbyexistingresearch,thetermsusedtodescribeourareasofinterestvarywidely.
Below,wedefinekeytermsastheyareusedinthisstudy.

Sustainabilityinitiative:Wedefinesustainabilityinitiativeasapastorpresentprogramorprojectwithin
acompanytoreduceenvironmentalimpact(e.g.,lessenergyneeded,lesswasteproduced,inputsare
environmentallypreferable).Specifically,asustainabilityinitiative
isanongoingaction(versusaonetimeinvestment);
isspecific,withdefined,measurablegoalsanddeliverables;
involvesmultipleconstituencieswithintheorganization(e.g.,companydivisions,
participants,otherstakeholders);
canfailorbeterminated;
notablyreducespollutionorconsumptionofenergyormaterialsbythecompanyorits
employees;
istactical(e.g.,improvesenergyefficiencyofbuildings)ratherthanstrategic(e.g.,integrates
sustainabilityintobusinessplanning);and
focusesoninternaloperationalcommitmentsandimpactratherthanpublicorconsumer
facingmessagesorpartnerships.

Thepurposeofthisnarrowdefinitionistofocusontheactualimplementationofacompanysapproach
tosustainability,regardlessofwhatdrivesitorpromotesit(suchasanoverarchingsustainability
strategy,desireforpublicrecognition,oradhocgrassrootseffort).2

Success(ofaninitiative):Successwasdeterminedbytheopinionsofthosefamiliarwiththeinitiativeat
agivenstudycompany.Seesectionbelowondevelopingperceivedmeasureofsuccess.

Companyculture:Wedefinecompanycultureastheextenttowhichemployeeswithinacompany
experienceeachofthefourCVFculturetypes:Control,Compete,Create,andCollaborate.

Inthisproject,culturewasratedbythosefamiliarwiththecompanyssustainabilityinitiatives.The
companycultureidentifiedbytheserespondentsmaybemoreorlessrepresentativeofthecultureof
thebusinessunitorcompanyasawhole.However,itisreasonabletoassumethat(1)thesurvey
respondentsareusuallyinvolvedindesigningand/orimplementingsustainabilityinitiatives,and(2)the

2
Manyparticipantcompaniesaswellasresearchersincludesocialissuessuchashumanrightsintheirdefinitionof
sustainability.Weacknowledgetheimportanceofsocialissuesforethical,longtermbusinesspractices,andoftenthesesocial
issuesareintertwinedwithenvironmentalissues.However,inordertomaintainamanageablescopeforthisstudy,weareonly
concernedwithenvironmentalsustainabilityinitiatives.Westronglyencouragesimilarresearchintoissuesofsocialandsocio
environmentalsustainability.

11|P a g e

cultureasexperiencedbythosewhoareimplementinganinitiativeislikelytoimpactthesuccessofthe
initiatives.

Businessunit:Smallestentitythatcontainsallofthesurveyrespondentsforagivencompany.

Greenteam:Wedefinethesetofindividualsthatareactivelyinvolvedintheplanningand
implementationofsustainabilityinitiativesasacompanysgreenteam.Thiswasacommonlyusedterm
amongstudycompanies,althoughthismaynotbeaformalgroupandmaybecalledbyanothername,
dependingonthecompany.Forourparticipantcompanies,werefertotheTeamSurveyrespondents
(describedbelow)asthegreenteam.

SurveyDesign:LeadSurvey
Theonlinesurveytoolwasadministeredintwoparts:theLeadSurvey,senttoacompanys
sustainabilityofficeroramemberofacompanysgreenteam,and theTeamSurvey(addressedbelow).
ThepurposesoftheLeadSurveywere(1)toquicklyidentifysustainabilityinitiativesattemptedtodate
atastudycompany,and(2)toselecttwoofthosesustainabilityinitiativestoinvestigateindetailusing
theTeamSurvey.

Thesurveyfirstprovidedalistofsustainabilityinitiativescommonlyfoundincompaniestoday.
Respondentsselectedthoseinitiativesthatappliedtotheircompany.Respondentswerealsoaskedto
nameadditionalpastorpresentsustainabilityinitiativesoccurringatthecompany.Fromthis
comprehensivelistofsustainabilityinitiatives,respondentsthenidentifiedtwoinitiativesthatwere
moresuccessfulandtwothatwerelesssuccessful,providingthegoals,startdate,andabrief
descriptionforeachinitiative.Thissurveytookrespondentsapproximately10minutestocomplete.
Whentheresponsestosurveyquestionsrequiredclarification,wefollowedupwiththesurvey
respondentviaemailortelephone.SeeAppendixAforsampleLeadSurvey.

SurveyDesign:TeamSurvey
ThepurposeoftheTeamSurveywasthreefold:(1)todeterminetheCVFprofileforacompanysculture,
(2)todeterminetheCVFprofileoftwosustainabilityinitiativesatthecompany,and(3)toassessthe
successofeachsustainabilityinitiativeinquestion.

AssessingCompanyCulture
ThequestionsontheTeamSurveywerebasedontheOCAI.Visually,thecompanysculturalprofileis
illustratedusingaradarchart.Figure3:SampleCompanyCultureProfiledepictsthecultureofasample
company,whichhasahighlycompetitivecompanyculture.

12|P a g e

Figure3:SampleCompanyCultureProfile

Therearemanyfactorsthatcontributetoacompanysculture.Inordertocreateaculturalprofilelike
theoneabove,thisstudyaskedrespondentsaboutfourdimensionsofculture:thecompanysdominant
characteristics,itsleadership,thenatureofthebonds(orglue)thatholdtheorganizationtogether,
andthecriteriausedfordeterminingsuccess.Foreachoftheseculturaldimensions,respondentswere
askedtodivide100pointsamongthefourstatementsdescribingthatdimension.Respondentsdivided
pointsbasedonhowsimilarthestatementwastotheircompany(100isverysimilarand0isnotatall
similartotheircompany).SeeFigure4forasamplequestionfromtheOCAI,whichwasusedinthis
research(CameronandQuinn,2006).

Figure4:SampleCompanyCultureQuestionontheTeamSurvey

13|P a g e

EachofthefourdescriptivestatementsisassociatedwithoneofthefourCVFquadrants.Byreviewing
pointallocationacrossthefourstatements,wewereabletounderstandtherelativedominanceofeach
culturetypeforagivencompany.

SeeAppendixBforafullTeamSurvey.

AssessingSustainabilityInitiatives
Theapproachusedtocharacterizeacompanysculturewasthenmodifiedtodescribeitssustainability
initiatives.Aswithculture,therearemanyaspectstoacompanyinitiative.Inordertocreateaprofile
liketheonecreatedforthecompanyculture,thisstudyaskedrespondentsaboutfourdimensionsofan
initiative:howtheinitiativebegan,howemployeesengagedintheinitiative,theleadershipofinitiative,
andthecriteriaforsuccessusedfortheinitiative.

Foreachofthesedimensions,respondentswereaskedtodivide100pointsbetweenthefour
descriptivestatements,dependingonhowsimilarthestatementwastotheinitiative(100isverysimilar
and0isnotatallsimilartotheinitiative).SeeFigure5forasamplequestion.

Figure5:SampleSustainabilityInitiativeQuestionontheTeamSurvey

Again,thefourdescriptivestatementsrepresenteachquadrantintheCVF.Weusedaniterativeinternal
processtodevelopthetextforeachstatement.Thestatementswerethenreviewedwithoneofthe
authorsoftheCVFtoensuretheyappropriatelycapturedtheintentofeachquadrant.

InordertolimitthetimerequiredtocompletetheTeamSurvey,wechoseoneinitiativecharacterized
asmoresuccessfulandoneinitiativecharacterizedaslesssuccessfulfromtheLeadSurvey.Weused
theabovedefinitionofsustainabilityinitiativetoselectwhichinitiativestouseforeachTeamSurvey.By
selectinginitiativesthatwereconsideredmoreorlesssuccessful,wewereabletoobservedifferences
betweenthesuccesslevelsofsustainabilityinitiatives.Theorderinwhichthemoreandlesssuccessful
initiativeswerepresentedontheTeamSurveyalternatedforeachparticipatingcompanytomitigate
orderbias.Fortheremainderofthepaper,theseinitiativeswillbereferredtoasInitiative1and
Initiative2,indicatingtheorderagiveninitiativewaspresentedontheTeamSurvey.

14|P a g e

AssessingSuccessofSustainabilityInitiatives
Weconsideredthreepotentialtypesofmeasuresfordeterminingthesuccessofaninitiative:

Objectivemeasure:Objectivemeasuresarequantifiableresultsofaninitiative,suchasdollars
saved,emissionsreduced,orchangeinemployeeturnover.However,inthecaseof
sustainabilityinitiatives,environmentalaccountingatmostcompanies(orevenbetween
divisions)istenuousatbest.Whilevariousrankingsandmeasurementsexist,themethodology
usedtodevelopthesescorecardsandindicatorsisoftensubjecttodebate.Forexample,ifa
companydecreasesitsperunitcarbonintensitybutincreasesitsabsoluteemissions,howdoes
itcomparetoanothercompanythatreduceditsabsoluteemissionsbysimplydecreasing
production?Inaddition,itisdifficulttoprovecausalassociationbetweeninvestmentinan
initiativeandaspecificobjectivemeasurethatisinfluencedsimultaneouslybymanydynamic
forces.

RecipientMeasure:Forthismeasure,recipientsofinitiativesratethesuccessofinitiatives(e.g.,
hotelpatrons,healthcarerecipients).However,itisdifficulttodefineandidentifyrecipients
thatbenefitfromacompanyssustainabilityrelatedinitiatives,asenvironmentalbenefitsare
broadreachingandmaybenefitmultipledispersedstakeholders.

SubjectiveorPerceivedMeasure:Thismeasureisbasedontheopinionofknowledgeable
peopleinthecompanyratingthesuccessofagiveninitiative.Thismeasuredoesnotprovide
specificresults(e.g.,poundsofwasteavoided),butinsteadprovidesageneralcharacterization
oflevelofsuccessforaninitiative.

Perceivedmeasureswereselected,astheyprovidedthemostreliableandavailablesourceof
assessmentacrossindustries.Thistypeofmeasurehasbeenusedinsimilarstudiesaswell(Yazici,
2009).

Fourdimensionsofsuccesswereusedinordertogainanunderstandingoftheinitiativesimpacton
multipleaspectsofthecompany.AsevenpointLikertscaleallowedrespondentstoindicatethedegree
towhichtheyagreedwithfourstatementsabouttheinitiativeslevelofsuccess:

"Ithinkthisinitiativewasworthdoing.
"Thisinitiativesignificantlyreducedthecompany'senvironmentalimpact(e.g.,reducedenergy,
inputs,waste).
Thisinitiativesignificantlyimprovedthecompany'sbottomline."
Thisinitiativesignificantlyimprovedemployeeawarenessand/ormorale.

Thescalealsoincludedanoptiontoindicateiftherespondentdidnotknowabouttheinitiativesothat
onlythosepeoplefamiliarwithaninitiativesimpactwouldcompletetheassessment.Aspeopletendto
favorresponsesontheleftsideofaLikertscale(i.e.,theordereffect)whileatthesametimefavoring
positiveresponses(i.e.,acquiescence),thescalewasconstructedsuchthatStronglyDisagreewason
theleftsideofthescale,withStronglyAgreeontheright(Brace,2008).

15|P a g e

SelectingandEngagingStudyCompanies
Criticaltotheresearchwasdevelopingalargesampleofcompanyparticipants,ideallyacrossseveral
industries.Inapproachingcompanyengagement,wedevelopedthefollowingcriteria:

Thecompanyhastriedtoimplementatleastfoursustainabilityinitiativesinthepast10years.
Thecompanyhasatleast6employeeswillingtoparticipateinthesurveythatareboth
knowledgeableaboutthesustainabilityinitiativesandrepresentasmanydepartmentsinvolved
inthedesignandimplementationofsustainabilityinitiativesaspossible.

Toengagewithcompanies,weutilizedseveralnetworksincludingUniversityofMichiganfaculty,Ross
SchoolofBusinessalumni,andErbInstituteforGlobalSustainableEnterpriseadvisoryboardmembers,
alumniandstudents.LearningfrompriorSchoolofNaturalResourcesandEnvironmentmasters
researchprojects,wepretestedthesurveywithacompanytoverifyitsstructureandlegibility.Thefinal
responseratewas18percent.Ofthosecompanieswhowerecontactedbutdidnotparticipate(102),64
werenotinterestedintheresearch(didnotrespondorrepliedthattheywerenotinterested),23were
interestedintheresearch(butdidnotfollowthroughonthesurvey,alreadyhadsimilarefforts,ordid
nothavethebandwidth),9hadnosuitablecontactstocompletetheLeadSurvey,and6declinedfor
variousotherreasons(e.g.,goingthroughbankruptcyormerger).Inresponding,companieswere
assuredthatproprietaryinformationaboutinitiativeswouldnotbepublishedanddatawouldbeusedin
aggregateforanalysisunlessotherwiseauthorized.Inadditiontothisaggregatereport,each
participatingcompanyreceivedcompanyspecificresultsofthestudyinaseparatereport.SeeAppendix
Cforsamplecompanyengagementmaterials.

Figure6:CompanyEngagementProcess

Administer
survey

Contact
companies and
set up survey

Supplement
survey data
with secondary
research

Analyze Data

Report back
to companies
with results

Supplement
with
interviews

Develop
engagement
materials for
participation

Develop list of
target
companies and
potential
contacts

The23companiesthatparticipatedinthestudyrepresenteddiverseindustries,fromindustrial
chemicalstoorganicfoodandbeverages,andrangedinsizefrom80to150,000plusemployees.Of
thosethatrespondedtothesurvey,58percentwerepubliclyheldand42percentwereprivatelyheld.
Onaverage,participatingcompanieswerelarge,withthemajorityover10,000employeesand83
percentwithannualsalesgreaterthanUS$1billion(thelargestwithsalesofoverUS$61billion).Foran
overviewofparticipatingcompanies,seeAppendixD.

16|P a g e

SelectingTeamSurveyRespondents
Asnotedabove,theTeamSurveycapturedasampleoftheindividualsinthecompanythatwere
involvedindesigningandimplementingsustainabilityefforts.Ourcontactateachstudycompany(i.e.,
thepersonthatcompletedtheLeadSurvey)identifiedcoworkersfamiliarwiththesustainability
initiativestocompletetheteamsurvey(e.g.,thoseonthegreenteamorthathelpedtoplan,approve,
implement,ormanagethesesustainabilityinitiatives).Throughthisscreeningprocess,weselected
respondentsthat(1)areapartofcompanysustainabilityeffortsandthereforecanrepresenttheculture
ofthoseworkingonsustainabilityrelatedtopics,and(2)canprovideinsightonthesuccessofthetwo
sustainabilityinitiativesdetailedintheTeamSurvey.

SecondaryResearch
Inordertosupplementtheprimarydatagathering,weconductedsecondaryresearchonthe23
participantcompanies.Thegoalsofthesecondaryresearchwere(1)toinvestigatewhethertherewere
anyrelationshipsbetweencompanycharacteristicsandtheresultsofthesurvey;(2)toidentifyany
patternsinthetypesofcompaniesthatrespondedtothesurvey;and(3)toensurethatthefinalsample
ofcompaniesrepresentedavarietyofindustries,sizes,ownershipstructures,andgeographiclocations.
Afterinvestigatingvariousbusinessdatabases,weusedOneSourceGlobalBusinessBrowsertocollect
secondarydataforeachfinalparticipantcompany.

17|P a g e

Analysis
Thefollowingoutlinesthestepsusedtostructure,prepare,andanalyzethestudydataset.

DataPreparation
DataforeachparticipatingcompanyweredownloadedfromQualtrics,theonlinesurveytoolusedto
collectprimarydata,intoExcel.Recordswereaggregatedacrosscompaniesandformatted.Records
werethenreviewedandremovedif(1)respondentsindicatedtheydidnotknowabouttheinitiativein
question,or(2)respondentdidnotfinishthecompanycultureassessment.

EachrespondenttotheTeamSurveyhadtheopportunitytoreviewtwoinitiatives,foratotal532
personinitiativerecords.Fortytwopersoninitiativerecordswerediscardedusingthereviewcriteria
above,foratotalof490personinitiativerecordsremaining.Weindependentlyreviewedthe42
discardedrecordstoensurevalidrecordswerenotaccidentallyremoved.

AfteruploadingthedatatoSPSS,wecalculatedadditionalfieldsbasedonthedatacollected.First,the
differencebetweentheaveragecompanycultureandtheindividualsassessmentoftheinitiativewere
computedforeachCVFquadrant.Asthesefieldscouldbenegative(iftheinitiativeaverageforthe
individualexceededthatforthecompany),theabsolutevalueforeachofthefourdifferencefieldswas
calculated,whereclosesttozerorepresentsgreatercongruencebetweentheprofileofthe
sustainabilityinitiativeandtheprofileofthecompanysculture.Initialanalysissuggestedthatthe
directionofthedifferencedidnotmatterasmuchasoverallmagnitude.

DatasetandStatisticalDesign
AtestforcorrelationbetweenanindividualsassessmentofInitiative1,Initiative2,andthecompany
culturewasusedtoidentifywhethertheaverageindividualassessmentsoftheinitiativesandthe
assessmentofcompanyculturetendedtobecorrelatedwithineachquadrant.Thistestidentifieda
significantcorrelationbetweenthethreevariables,indicatingthatanalysisshouldaddressrandom
effectsinthedata.Randomeffectsoccurwhenvariationisobservedatmultiplelevelsinthedatadueto
randomlysampledunits(e.g.,studycompanies,orpeoplewithinthosecompanies).Inthisstudy,
dependenciesinthedataoccurredbecausemultiplepeoplefromthesamecompanyassessedthesame
twosustainabilityinitiatives.

Inordertoaddressthepotentialrandomeffects,thestudydatasetwasstructuredtoreflectthenested
designofthestudy:
Company(Level2)Onerecordpercompany.Includes,companyaveragesandstandard
deviationsofpersonlevelresponses.
PersonInitiative(Level1)Tworecordsforeverypersondescribingagivensustainability
initiativeatacompany(2initiativesperperson,1initiativeperpersonperrecord).Includes,
assessmentofsustainabilityinitiativesanddependentvariables(measuresofsuccess)noted
below.

Thegoalofthisanalysisistopredictmeasuresofinitiativesuccessusingdifferencesinvariablesatthe
initiativepersonandcompanylevel.TheabovestructureenabledtheuseofHierarchicalLinearand
NonlinearModeling(HLM)toperformtheanalysisandaddressrandomeffectsofcompanies,giventhe
nestedstudydesign.SeeAppendixEforadiagramofthestudydataset.

18|P a g e

StudyVariables
Thedependentvariablesforthisanalysisarefourmeasuresofperceivedinitiativesuccessasassessed
bysurveyrespondents:theoverallworth,theenvironmentalimpact,thefinancialimpact,andthe
impactonemployeesatthecompany.Thesedependentvariableswerehighlycorrelatedwithone
another.Asaresultofthishighcorrelation,theremainderofthestudywillconsideronlytheoverall
worthoftheinitiativeasthedependentvariableusedinanalysis.Thisvariablewasselectedasithadthe
mostindividualresponses.

Figure7:CorrelationsbetweenDependentVariables

Asnotedinthemethodologysection,thesemeasuresuseda7pointLikertscale.Asmostofthe
assessmentsclusteredbetween5and7ona7pointscale,thescalewascollapsedtoa4pointscale,
groupinginitialcategories14intoonecategoryforlessworthwhile.

Theindependentvariablesforthisanalysisareasfollows:
[Level1]Thesumofthemagnitudeofthedifferencebetweentheinitiativeandcompany
profilesineachCVFquadrant(Collaborate,Create,Compete,Control)
[Level1]Themagnitudeofthedifferencebetweentheinitiativeandcompanycultureprofiles
foreachCVFquadrant(Collaborate,Create,Compete,Control)
[Level2]Dummyvariablesindicatingthequadrantwiththehighestaveragescore
[Level2]Companydemographicvariables(levelofinternalcooperation,type,size,roleROI
playsindevelopingandevaluatinginitiativesatthecompany)

SeeAppendixFforkeyvariablenamesandassociateddescriptions.

19|P a g e

StudySampleSize
Theonlinesurveytoolwasopenfor3.5months(November2009February2010).Duringthattime,29
companiescompletedtheLeadSurveyand23companieshad6ormoreemployeescompletetheTeam
Survey.Insomeinstances,wefoundthattheremayhaveonlybeensixpeopleatacompanywhoknew
enoughabouttheselectedsustainabilityinitiativesandwereavailabletotaketheTeamSurvey.Inother
cases,companieswereabletofindmorethantenpeoplequalifiedtotaketheTeamSurvey.Usingsixor
morepeopletoformgeneralizationshasbeenusedinpriorcasestudiesaboutorganizationalculture(K.
Cameron,personalcommunication,December15,2009).Therefore,weincludedthesecompaniesin
thisanalysis.

20|P a g e

Findings
DescriptionofStudyCompaniesandInitiatives
Ofthe23companiesinthestudysample,17(74percent)haveadominantculture(wheredominant
cultureisdefinedbythequadrantallocatedthemostpointsandthosepointsaregreaterthan1
standarddeviationabovethemeanofthefourquadrants).AsillustratedinFigure8,theCompete
quadrantwasstronglypresentinjustunderhalfthestudycompanies.Incomparison,theotherthree
quadrantswerelessdominant.

Figure8:DistributionofDominantCVFQuadrantacrossStudyCompanies

DominantQuadrant
Collaborate
Compete
Control
Create
Total

NumberofCompanieswithDominantQuadrant
(>1StandardDeviationabovetheMean)
3
9
4
1
17

Itcanalsobehelpfultoexaminethegeneralshapeofacompanysculturalprofile.Consistentwiththe
distributionofdominantculturesabove,themajorityofstudycompaniesarestronglyrootedin
CompeteandControltendencies(presentfocused,processandmetricsoriented,commandand
control).

Figure9:DistributionofCVFProfileShapeacrossStudyCompanies

TopTwoStrongestCompanyCultureQuadrants
Bottom(ControlCompete)
Top(CollaborateCreate)
Diagonal(CompeteCollaborate)
Right(CreateCompete)

#ofCompanies
15
2
3
3

Thesametypeofanalysiscanbedonefortheinitiativesassessedinthisstudy.Ofthe46initiatives
profiled,38(83percent)haveadominantculture.Unlikethecompanyculturedistribution,allquadrants
aredominantinthesample,withCompetebeingthedominantquadrantleastrepresented.

Figure10:DistributionofDominantCVFQuadrantacrossStudyInitiatives

DominantQuadrant
Collaborate
Compete
Control
Create
Total

21|P a g e

NumberofInitiativeswithDominantQuadrant
(>1StandardDeviationabovetheMean)
11
7
12
8
38

Comparingthedominantquadrantsofcompanycultureandinitiativeprofiles,wefindthatthemajority
ofdominantquadrantsdonotalignacrosscompanycultureandinitiative.Ofthe17companieswitha
dominantculture,7initiativessharedthesamedominantquadrantasthecompanyculturewhile27
initiativesdidnot.

Figure11:ComparisonofDominantQuadrantsbetweenCompanyCultureandInitiative

InitiativeProfileandCompanyCultureProfile
DominantQuadrantforInitiativesameasDominant
QuadrantforCompany

#ofInitiatives
7

DominantQuadrantforInitiativedifferentthan
DominantQuadrantforCompany

27

Asstatedinthemethodologysection,twoinitiativeswereevaluatedateachofthe23studycompanies.
Thus,thereare23initiativesthatwereconsideredrelativelymoresuccessfulthantheotherinitiativeat
thesamecompany.Acrossthe23moresuccessfulinitiativestherewasanevendistributionofdominant
quadrants,withfourinitiativeswithoutadominantquadrant.

Figure12:DistributionofDominantQuadrantsacrossMoreandLessSuccessfulInitiatives

TypeofInitiative
LessSuccessful
MoreSuccessful

TypeofDominantQuadrant
None
4
4

Collaborate Compete
7
2
4
5

Control
7
5

Create
3
5

Total
23
23

Comparingthedominantquadrantsofcompanycultureandinitiativeprofiles,wefindthatagreater
percentage(5of17)ofthemoresuccessfulinitiativesalignwithcompanycultureprofilethandothe
lesssuccessfulinitiatives(2of17).

Figure13:ComparisonofDominantQuadrantsbetweenCompanyCultureandInitiativeforMoreandLessSuccessful
Initiatives

MoreSuccessful
Initiatives

LessSuccessful
Initiatives

DominantQuadrantforInitiativesameas
DominantQuadrantforCompany

DominantQuadrantforInitiativedifferent
thanDominantQuadrantforCompany

12

15

InitiativeProfileandCompanyCultureProfile

22|P a g e

Hypothesis1:CulturalDifferencesbetweenCompanyCultureandInitiative
Greatersimilaritybetweencompanycultureandasustainabilityinitiativeleadstogreatersuccessofthe
initiative.
ObservationalApproach
Foreachcompany,weconstructedaradarchartdepictingtheaveragecompanycultureprofileandthe
averageprofilesforInitiatives1and2(usingtheaggregatedresponsesfromindividualsatagiven
company)asdescribedinthemethodologysection.

Wethencalculatedthecongruencebetweenthecompanycultureandinitiativeprofiles.Congruenceis
definedasthesumoftheabsolutedifferencebetweenthecompanyscultureandaninitiativeprofilein
eachofthefourquadrants.Inotherwords,howsimilaristheinitiativeprofiletothecompanyculture
profile?

Figure14:SampleCompanyProfile1(Initiative1MoreSuccessful)

Outof23companiesobserved,16companies(or70percent)ratedthemorecongruentinitiativeas
moresuccessfulthantheinitiativethatwaslesscongruent.Intheabovecaseexample,Initiative1(red
dashedline)ismorecongruentwiththecompanyculture(bluesolidline)thanInitiative2(orangeshort
dashedline).EmployeessurveyedatthiscompanyalsoratedInitiative1asmoreworthwhileoverall
thanInitiative2.

Additionally,whencongruenceforonlythestrongesttwoquadrantsofthecultureprofilewere
considered,74percentofcompanies(17of23)ratedthemorecongruentinitiativeasmoresuccessful
thanthelesscongruentinitiative.

23|P a g e

StatisticalApproach
First,weranasimplecorrelationanalysisofthetotalabsolutedifferencebetweenthecultureandthe
initiativeprofileacrossallquadrants(diff_total)andthemeasureofperceivedinitiativesuccess
(p_worth2).AsillustratedinFigure15,asignificantrelationshipbetweenthesetwovariableswasfound.
Thenegativecorrelationsuggeststhatasthetotaldifferencebetweenthecompanycultureand
initiativedecreases,perceivedsuccessincreases.

Figure15:CorrelationMatrixforPerceivedInitiativeSuccessvs.Congruence

Wethenexaminedthedatausinganordinalmodel,withourdependentvariable(DV)asthemeasureof
perceivedinitiativesuccess(p_worth2).Asnotedinthemethodologysection,theDVisacategorical
variablerangingfrom1(lesssuccessful)to4(verysuccessful).Ourindependentvariableswerethe
measureofoverallcongruence(diff_tot)andthecompanylevelvariablescontrollingforthestrongest
CVFquadrant,sizeofcompany,levelofperceivedcooperationatthecompany,andthedegreetowhich
ROIfactoredintodecisionstoadoptsustainabilityinitiative.WhilemodelingacontinuousDVisgoodfor
understandingcoefficientdirection,anordinalmodelismoreappropriateforthisanalysisasthe
dependentvariableiscategorical.

Figure16:ModelParametersforHypothesis1

24|P a g e


AsillustratedbyFigure17,theoverallmeasureofcongruence(diff_tot)wasfoundtobesignificantat
the.05level(r=0.538),withapositivecoefficient.Intheordinalmodel,everyunitincreaseinthe
predictivevariable(diff_tot)correspondstoanincreaseintheoddsofalowervalueforthedependent
variable.Therefore,weexpecttoseeapositivefixedeffect(i.e.,coefficient)forthecongruence
measure(diff_tot)asanincreaseinthedifferenceimpliesanincreaseintheoddsofseeingalower
valuefortheDV(i.e.,lessperceivedsuccessoftheinitiative).

Figure17:EstimatedFixedEffectsandStandardErrorsforHypothesis1

ThemagnitudeofincreaseintheoddsofseeingalowervaluefortheDVisspecifiedbytheOddsRatio.
AsdepictedinFigure18below,everyoneunitincreaseinthedifferencebetweenthecompanyculture
andinitiativeprofilecorrespondstoa1percentincreaseintheoddsofseeingalowervaluefortheDV
(perceivedsuccessoftheinitiative).

Figure18:OddsRatioandConfidenceIntervalforHypothesis1

25|P a g e

Hypothesis2:RoleofCollaborationinSustainabilityInitiatives
Greatersimilaritybetweenthecompanysemphasisoncollaborationandtheinitiativesemphasison
collaborationleadstogreatersuccessoftheinitiative.

ObservationalApproach
Ofthestudycompaniesobserved,74percent(17of23)identifiedtheinitiativewiththesmaller
differencebetweenthecompanycultureandinitiativeprofilesintheCollaboratequadrantasmore
successfulthantheinitiativewiththelargerdifferencebetweenthecompanycultureandinitiative
profilesintheCollaboratequadrant.Thatis,theclosertheinitiativeprofileistothecompanyculture
profileintheCollaboratequadrant,themoresuccessfulthatinitiativeislikelytobe.

Figure19:SampleCompanyProfile2(Initiative2MoreSuccessful)
Culture

Initiative1

Initiative2

Flexible
40

COLLABORATE

30

CREATE

20
10

Internal

CONTROL

External

COMPETE

Structured

Intheaboveexample,Initiative1(reddashedline)islesscongruentthan(i.e.,moredifferentfrom)the
companyculture(bluesolidline)thanInitiative2(orangeshortdashedline)intheCollaboratequadrant.
EmployeessurveyedatthiscompanyalsothoughtInitiative2wasoverallmoreworthwhilethan
Initiative1.

StatisticalApproach:
First,weranasimplecorrelationbetweenthemagnitudeofthedifferencebetweenthecompany
cultureandinitiativeprofileintheCollaboratequadrant(diff_y_a)andthemeasureofperceived
initiativesuccess(p_worth2).AsillustratedinFigure20,thedegreeofdifferencebetweenthecompany
cultureandtheinitiativeprofileintheCollaboratequadranthasasignificantrelationshipwiththe
overallsuccessoftheinitiative.Asexpected,thesevariablesarenegativelycorrelated,suggestingthat
asthedifferencedecreases,themeasureofsuccessincreases.

26|P a g e

Figure20:CorrelationbetweenPerceivedSuccessandCongruenceintheCollaborateQuadrant

WethenrananordinalmodeltoevaluatetheimpactofthepredictivepoweroftheLevel1difference
variablefortheCollaboratequadrant(diff_y_a)andLevel2companyvariables.Companylevelvariables
includethelevelofcooperation,numberofemployees,whetherthecompanyispublicorprivate,and
thedegreetowhichROIinfluencestheadoptionofsustainabilityinitiativesatthecompany.

Figure21:ModelParametersforHypothesis2

AsillustratedinFigure22,wefoundasignificantrelationshipatthe.01level(r=0.604)betweenthe
perceivedoverallsuccessofaninitiativeandthedifferencebetweenthecompanycultureandinitiative
profileintheCollaboratequadrant.Thecoefficientforthesignificantvariable(diff_y_a)ispositive,as
expected.Thismeans,asthedifferenceintheCollaboratequadrant(regardlessofdirection)between
thecompanycultureandtheinitiativegetsbigger,thelikelihoodofperceivedinitiativesuccess
decreases.Noneofthecompanylevelvariablesaresignificantatthe.05level.

27|P a g e

Figure22:EstimatedFixedEffectsandStandardErrorsforHypothesis2

AsdepictedinFigure23below,everyoneunitincreaseinthedifferencebetweenthecompanyculture
andinitiativeprofileintheCollaboratequadrantcorrespondstoa1.02percentincreaseintheoddsof
seeingalowervaluefortheDV(perceivedsuccessoftheinitiative).

Figure23:OddsRatioandConfidenceIntervalforHypothesis2

AlthoughthedifferencebetweenthecompanycultureandinitiativeintheCollaboratequadrantis
significant,giventhelevelofvarianceremainingwesurmisethatthereareothercompanylevel
variablesthatcouldexplainvarianceinthemeans(e.g.,incentives,industry,orhistoryofsustainability
atcompany).And,asthemajorityofthevarianceoccursatthepersoninitiativelevel,werecognizethat
thedifferenceintheCollaboratequadrantisnottheonlyimportantLevel1factorindetermining
sustainabilityinitiativesuccess.

28|P a g e

Discussion
Ourfindingshaveimplicationsforbothresearchersandpractitionerstryingtoplanandimplement
sustainabilityinitiatives.Wehavealsoidentifiednumerousareasforfutureresearchthatbuildonour
findings.

InterpretationofFindings
1. Hypothesis1statesthatgreatersimilaritybetweencompanycultureandasustainabilityinitiative
willleadtohighersuccessoftheinitiative.Thefindingsofthisstudyindicatethefollowing:

a. Thereisarelationshipbetweencongruenceandinitiativesuccess.
Thefirstquestionthisstudysoughttoanswerwaswhetherarelationshipexistsbetween
culturalcongruenceandthesuccessofsustainabilityinitiativeswithinacompany.Asthe
findingsindicate,thereissucharelationship,basedonbothobservationalandstatistical
methods.Inotherwords,thisstudyfindsthatwhenitcomestoimplementingcorporate
sustainabilityinitiatives,culturedoesindeedmatter.Thisfindingisconsistentwiththe
growinginterestinorganizationalbehaviorandemployeeengagementinthesustainability
field.FromWalmartsimplementationofPersonalSustainabilityProjectstoprofessional
developmentpresentationswithtitlessuchasTheHolyGrailofSustainableCulture
Change:EmployeeEngagementandTheSecretBenefitofSustainabilityStrategies:
EmployeeEngagement,companiesandsustainabilityprofessionalsaredemonstratinga
growinginterestinthisarea(NetImpact,2010).Thisstudyofferssomeempiricalvalidation
oftheimportanceoftheseconsiderationswithincompanies.Thenextlogicalquestionis,
Whatistheexactnatureofthisrelationship?

b. Greatercongruenceisassociatedwithgreaterinitiativesuccess.
Trendsobservedinthedatasuggestthatacompanyssustainabilityinitiativesaremore
likelytobesuccessfuliftheinitiativesaredevelopedandimplementedinawaythatis
consistentwiththecompanysculture.Thisfindingpointstotheimportanceofcompanies
firstunderstandingtheirculture,andthenthinkingcriticallyabouthowtodesignand
implementtheirsustainabilityinitiatives.Thisinterpretationisconsistentwiththeworkof
EpsteinandRoy(2001)whonote,Thealignmentofstrategy,structure,andmanagement
systemsareessentialforcompaniestobothcoordinateactivitiesandmotivateemployees
towardimplementingasustainabilitystrategy.Figure24belowcapturesanexampleof
congruencebetweencompanycultureandaninitiative.Atthiscompany,employees
consideredInitiative1moresuccessfulthanInitiative2.

29|P a g e

Figure24:SampleCompanyProfile3(Initiative1MoreSuccessful)

c. LessonslearnedfromthosecasesthatdonotsupportHypothesis1
Although70percentofcaseswereconsistentwithourhypothesis,thereweresevencases
inwhichasmallerdifferencebetweencompanycultureandinitiativeprofileswasnot
associatedwiththemoresuccessfulinitiative.Whiletheseexceptionssuggestfurther
researchisrequired,webelievethelackofrelationshipbetweencongruenceandsuccess
canbeexplainedinmostofthesecases.

Thefirstexceptionalcaseinvolvesaprofessionalservicesfirm.Thisfirmistheonlystudy
companythatisentirelyservicebased,anditscultureisrepresentativeofitshighly
competitiveindustry.Duringaninterviewwiththecompanyscorporateresponsibility
director,wediscoveredthatthefirmssustainabilityeffortsarelargelydrivenbyemployees
andareintendedtoimproverecruitment,retentionandengagement.Atothercompanies,
however,sustainabilityinitiativesareoftendrivenbycostsavings,regulatorypressure,
competitivepressure,andotherfactorsthataretypicallyrepresentedinotherquadrants.

30|P a g e

Figure25:CompanyProfileforaProfessionalServicesFirm
Culture

Initiative1

Initiative2

Flexible
50

COLLABORATE

40

CREATE

30
20
10

Internal

CONTROL

External

COMPETE

Structured

Thesecondexceptionalcasesuggeststhatastrongexternalmotivationcansupersede
cultureasadeterminingfactor.Inresearchoncooperation,superordinategoalsareusedto
bridgedifferencesacrosspartiesinconflict(WondolleckandYaffee,2000).Weseea
potentialsuperordinategoalinthiscasesincetherewasastrongregulatorymandate
influencingtheimplementationofthemoresuccessfulsustainabilityinitiative(Initiative2).
Theresultinginitiativeprofileisdistinctfromtheotherinitiativesinthatitisheavilyskewed
towardsonequadrant(Control)whileignoringanotherquadrantaltogether.SeeFigure26.

Figure26:ProfileofInitiativeRespondingtoRegulatoryMandate(Initiative2MoreSuccessful)

31|P a g e

Finally,inthreeofthefiveremainingcasesinwhichalargerdifferencebetweenthecompany
cultureandinitiativeprofileswasassociatedwiththemoresuccessfulinitiative,weobserved
thatthemajorityofthisdifferencewasduetotheinitiativesstrongCreatequadrant(Figure
27).Thisisconsistentwiththeconclusionofnumerousresearchersthatcompanieswillneedto
innovatenew,moreefficientandlessresourceintensivewaysofdeliveringgoodsandservices
inordertobecomemoresustainable(Schaltegger,1997;Steger,1998;Ytterhus,1997).This
intuitivelymakessenseascorporatesustainabilityisarelativelynewfieldwithalotofroomfor
innovation,whichrequiresforwardthinkingcharacteristicofthisquadrant.

Figure27:ProfileofaCompanywithMoreSuccessfulInitiativeinCreateQuadrant

2. Hypothesis2statesthatgreatersimilaritybetweenthecompanysemphasisoncollaborationand
theinitiativesemphasisoncollaborationleadstogreatersuccessoftheinitiative.Thefindingsof
thisstudyindicatethefollowing:

a. ThereisastrongrelationshipintheCollaboratequadrantbetweencongruenceand
successofsustainabilityinitiatives.
WhilethedegreeoftotaldifferenceacrosstheCVFquadrantsisimportant,itspredictive
natureisdrivenlargelybythedifferenceintheCollaboratequadrant.TheCollaborate
quadrantmeasurestheleveloffactorssuchasteamwork,mentoring,support,
communication,empowerment,andlisteningatacompanyorinaninitiative.Asexisting
researchindicates,collaborationisparticularlycriticaltotheimplementationof
sustainabilityinitiativesduetotheircrossfunctional,complex,andvoluntarynature.

32|P a g e


b. GreatercongruenceintheCollaboratequadrantisstronglyassociatedwithgreater
successofsustainabilityinitiatives
AsthedifferencebetweentheinitiativeandcompanycultureprofilesintheCollaborate
quadrantdecreases,thelikelihoodofinitiativesuccessincreases.Thisimpliesthatsuccessful
sustainabilityinitiativesdonotnecessarilyrequireahighdegreeofcollaborationinthe
companynorahighdegreeofcollaborationintheinitiative,butratherthedegreesof
collaborationinthecompanyandtheinitiativeneedtomatch.Bothobservationaland
statisticalanalysesofthedatasupportthisconclusion.

Thisfindingcouldpointtotherolethatpsychologicalcontractsplayinorganizational
effectiveness.Psychologicalcontractsareasetofperceivedobligationsandarefoundedon
trust(Robinson,1996).ThecharacteristicsoftheCollaboratequadrantspeaktocritical
componentsofbuildingtrustbetweenemployeesandmanagers.Thus,alargerdifference
betweentheinitiativeandcompanycultureintheCollaboratequadrantcouldchallengethe
psychologicalcontractthatemployeeshavewiththeircompany.Trustisveryimportantfor
engagementinactivities,suchasmanysustainabilityinitiatives,thatarenotrequiredaspart
oftheprimaryjobfunction(MaceyandSchneider,2008).Studieshavefoundthat
challengingthepsychologicalcontractiscorrelatedwithdecliningemployeeengagement
(TurnleyandFeldman,2000;KickulandLester,2001).Decreasedengagementnegatively
impactsemployeeperformanceandoutlook.

Theabovetheoryisparticularlyrelevanttosustainabilityinitiatives,whichoftenrequire
employeestoparticipateintasksthatarenotincludedintheirprimaryjobdescription.For
example,ifacompanyhasalesscollaborativecultureandtriestoimplementaninitiative
thatislargelycollaborative,itmaystruggletogeneratethevoluntary,flexible,andinformal
participationthatsuchinitiativesrequire.

PrescriptiveGuidanceforPractitioners
Whenplacedinthelargercontextofcorporatesustainability,theaboveinterpretationssuggestthere
aredimensionstoconsiderwhendesigningandimplementinginitiativesthatarenotcurrentlyapartof
thetraditionalcorporatemanagementparadigm.
TraditionalApproachtoInitiativePlanningandImplementation
Ina2009reviewofleadingprojectmanagementjournals,factorsidentifiedascriticaltoprojectsuccess
includeelementsoforganizationalculture(e.g.,characteristicsoftheprojectteamleader,power,and
politics)butdonotaddressorganizationalculturedirectly(Ika,2009).Inaseparatestudy,Yazicifound
that"thereisverylittleresearchconductedontheroleoforganizationalcultureinprojectmanagement.
Despitetheextensiveresearchinprojectmanagementprocessesandtechniques,aswellasinproject
leadership,organizationalcultureislargelyunderexaminedinprojectmanagementresearch"(Yazici,
2009).

Thisfindingisconsistentwithmanyprojectimplementationframeworksinusetoday.Forexample,the
revisedLogicalFrameworkApproachMillenniumreferencescultureintheprojectdesignprocessbut
onlyinthecontextoftodayscorporateculture.Theauthorsdonotsuggestcateringinitiativedesign
toaspecifictypeofcompanyculture.Additionally,whileacknowledgingtheimportanceof
understandinganinitiativescontext,theauthorssuggestexploringthatcontextthroughtraditional
33|P a g e

meanssuchasSWOTanalysis(JeanCouillardetal.,
2009).EpsteinandRoy(2001)proposeaframework
Makingthechange:Laying
fordevelopingandimplementingsustainability
initiatives,butwhileorganizationalcultureisnoted,
thegroundworkforsuccess
theauthorsprimarilyviewcultureasalever
throughwhichtoimproveanorganizationsoverall
Planningandimplementingsuccessful
environmentalperformanceratherthanameansof
sustainabilityinitiativesrequiresthe
guidinginitiativeplanningandimplementation.
sameconsiderationsasanychange

managementprocess.Priortoexploring
Throughinterviewswithourstudycompanies,we
theculturalissuesthatcanhelporhinder
foundthatawiderangeofprocessesandtoolsare
thesuccessofaninitiative,practitioners
usedtovet,plan,andimplementsustainability
shouldthinkaboutthespecificcontext
initiatives,suchas
fortheirchangemanagementefforts:
materialitymatrices,
financial(ROI)analysis,
Followbestpracticesforchange
decentralizeddecisionmakingtomeet
managementtoreadythe
corporatetargets,
organizationforchange.
approvalbycouncil,and
Identifykeyinternalstakeholders
unilateraldecisionmaking.
anddeterminewhetherthey
Furthermore,manyparticipantssaidthatthe
understandthevalueofachange
processesusedtovet,plan,andimplement
processthatexplicitlyconsiders
sustainabilityinitiativesdependonthetype,scope,
culture.
andcapitalrequirementsoftheinitiative.
Togeneratebuyin,refertoevidence

linkingcultureandorganizational
Participantsgenerallyrecognizedthatitwas
effectiveness(p.5)andanyexamples
importanttoimplementinitiativesinawaythatis
inyourcompanywhenamismatch
compatiblewiththeircompanysculture,often
betweentheinitiativeand
statingthattheyaskthemselves,Wouldthiswork
organizationalcultureledto
here?aspartoftheplanningprocess.Similarly,
challenges.
manyparticipantssaidthatcompanyleadershipsets
corporategoalsandthenallowsbusinessunitsand
localfacilitiestodecidehowtoreachthosegoals.
Bothoftheseapproachessuggestthatcultureisimplicitlyconsideredinthedevelopmentof
sustainabilityinitiatives.However,noneofthecompaniesinterviewedsystematicallyconsidered
companycultureaspartoftheinitiativedevelopmentandimplementationprocess.
ConsideringCompanyCultureinInitiativeDesignandImplementation
Asnotedintheliteraturereview,companyculturerequiresalongtimetochange.Therefore,this
sectionfocusesonguidancefornearterminitiativeplanningandimplementationratherthanculture
change.

Whiletraditionalmeansofvettinginitiativesshouldnotbeignored,theprocessbelowsuggests
additionalconsiderationstofurtherthelikelihoodthatasustainabilityinitiativewillsucceed.The
questionsinFigure28areintendedtohelppractitionersstartthinkingaboutculturalissuesthatcan
helporhinderthesuccessofsustainabilityinitiatives.Itisworthnotingthattheprocesswesuggest
supplementstheexistingbodyofknowledgeonorganizationalchange(seesidebar).

34|P a g e

Figure28:IncorporatingCultureintoInitiativePlanningandImplementation
Assessyourcompanyculture
o UseacultureassessmenttoolsuchastheCompetingValuesFrameworkthatconsiders
multipledimensionsofanorganizationsculture(e.g.,leadership,dominant
characteristics,andcriteriaforsuccess).
Planinitiativewithcompanycultureinmind
o Howareideasfornewinitiativesgeneratedanddeveloped?
o Whataretheexpectationsforhowemployeeswillparticipateintheinitiative?
o Howwillinitiativesuccessbemeasuredandrecognized?
Implementandcommunicateinitiativewithcompanycultureinmind
o Whattypeofleadershoulddrivethisprojectorprogram?
o Whoshouldmonitorandevaluatetheinitiative?
o Howshouldprojectobjectivesandoutcomesbearticulatedinternally?

Forpractitionersinterestedinaligninginitiativesandculture,Figure29providesexamplesofspecific
planningandimplementationtacticsorganizedaccordingtotheCompetingValuesFramework.For
example,ifacompanyhasassesseditscultureandknowsthatitisstrongintheCompetequadrant,it
mightconsideracompetitivemeansofideageneration(e.g.,acontestbetweenindividualsorbusiness
units).Thisincreasesthelikelihoodofcongruencebetweentheinitiativeandpervadingcompany
culture,andaccordinglyincreasesthelikelihoodofinitiativesuccess.

ThesampletacticsbelowarebasedonourprofessionalexperienceandsuggestionsfoundinCameron
andQuinnsresearchonimplementingchangewithinorganizations(2006).Werecognizethatthese
tacticsarenotappropriateforallsituationsaseachcompanyisunique.Instead,theyaremeantto
promptdiscussionaroundincorporatingcultureintoinitiativeplanningandimplementation.

Figure29:MatchingYourInitiativetoYourOrganizationalCulture

CollaborateTactics
HowInitiative

Begins

Expectationsfor
Participants

Leadershipof

Initiative

Criteriafor

Success

Facilitategroupbrainstormingsessions
Establishorimproveemployeesuggestionandfeedbacksystem
Developanonlineinternalcollaborationplatform
Createacrossfunctionalworkinggrouptofacilitateideasharingand
relationshipbuildingbetweenemployees
Involvemultiplelevelsofthecompanyinstrategicplanningprocess
Emphasizeteamworkandmentoring
Ensurefollowuponemployeesuggestionsandinput
Assessthesuccessoftheteamprocessinplanningandimplementationofthe
initiatives
Createmetricsfocusedonemployeedevelopment
continued

35|P a g e

CreateTactics
HowInitiative
Begins
Expectationsfor
Participants
Leadershipof
Initiative
Criteriafor
Success

CompeteTactics
HowInitiative
Begins

Expectationsfor
Participants

Leadershipof
Initiative
Criteriafor
Success

ControlTactics
HowInitiative
Begins

Expectationsfor
Participants
Leadershipof
Initiative
Criteriafor
Success

36|P a g e

Utilizeweb2.0andcrowdsourcingtogeneratenewideasfaster
Createatrainingprogramtocultivatecreativethinking
Setexpectationsthatemployeesviewthemselvesasnovelproblemsolvers
Developsystemstoencourageinnovation(e.g.,designatedtimeforpersonal
projects)
Encourageafocusonmanagingforthefuturevs.shorttermplanning
Emphasizeorganizationalagilityandinnovation
Incorporateiterativelearningintoprogramevaluation
Assesshowtransformationalratherthanincrementalimpactofinitiative
Tracktheamountoftimespentondiscussingfutureorientedtopicsvs.current
orpastorientedtopics
Createmetricsfocusedonrevenueorcostsavingsgeneratedfromnew
productsorserviceslaunched

Establishgoals,objectives,andmeasuresbasedoncompanyvisionand
standards
Benchmarkperformanceagainstinitiativesofkeycompetitors
Usecompetitivemeansforprojectideageneration,suchasacontestbetween
individualsorteams
Trackactivitiesofindividualsandregularlyprovidefeedbackthatcompares
performanceamongothersindividuals,teams,orbusinessunits
Setexpectationsthatemployeeswillregularlybeheldaccountabletoproject
goalsandmetrics
Emphasizeachievementofstretchgoals
Recognizetopperformingemployeesthrougheventsorcommunications
Developmetricsfocusedonkeyindustrytargetssuchasgreenhousegas
emissionsorsolidwastereduction
Assesshowtheinitiativecontributestooverallcompanystrategyand
competitiveness

Analyzeorauditexistingprocessesandenvironmentalimpacts(e.g.,lifecycle
analysis)
Reviewexistingpoliciesforproceduralinefficienciesandopportunities
Understandrelevantregulationsandassociatedriskexposure
Setexpectationthatemployeeswillrecognizeandacttoreducesystemwaste,
disruption,andinefficiencies
Clearlycommunicateacceptedcompanystructuresandprocedures
Emphasizesystemoptimization,coordination,structure,andsmoothrunning
efficiency
Empowerbusinessunitstoanalyzeandadjustinitiativesasneeded
Createmetricsfocusedonongoingreductionofthecompany'senvironmental
footprint
Trackadherencetoenvironmentalregulations

BenefitsofCounterCultureInitiatives
Whiletheremaybeadditionalchallengesposedbycountercultureinitiatives,somepractitionersmay
choosetoexperimentwithcountercultureinitiativesaspartoflongertermculturalchangeeffort.For
example,anationalinsurancecarrierrecentlymovedtoacollaborativesalesplanningprocessinan
efforttobetterunderstandlocalmarketopportunities.Inadditiontodevelopingmarketspecific
strategies,thisinitiativeisalsoworkingtoinstitutionalizegreatercollaborationacrossdivisionsina
CompeteorControldominantcompany,withthegoaltoincreasetrust,creativity,andrevenueinthe
longterm.

AreasforFutureResearch

Findingsfromthisstudyalsosuggestadditionalareasforcontinuedresearch:

1. Whatistheimpactofframingonthesuccessofsustainabilityinitiatives?Thewayaninitiativeis
describedinternallymayaffectitsrelationshiptoculture,soresearchonhowissuesareframed
andtheelementsoftheinitiativethatleadtoacertainkindofframingmaybeofinterestto
researchers.Forexample,aninitiativecouldhavebeenwellmarketedinternally,soemployees
thinkitwassuccessful.Likewise,ifaninitiativeisframedasasustainabilityinitiative,are
participantsmoresatisfiedwithacollaborativeapproach?Wouldthisdifferifitwereframedas
anefficiencyorcostsavinginitiative?

2. Whatistheimpactofadditionalvariablesnotmeasuredinthisstudy,suchasfinancialincentive
plans,thepresenceofanorganizationalchangestrategytointegratesustainabilityinto
corporatecultureanddailypractices,thedegreeofindividualchangerequiredbyaninitiative,
theindustry,andahistoryofhighprofileenvironmentalcrisesatacompany?

3. Docertaintypesofcompanyculturesleadtomoresuccessfulsustainabilityinitiatives?

4. Howareallemployeesengagedinsustainabilityandwhataretheimplicationsforcreating
effectivegreenteamsandimplementingeffectivesustainabilityinitiatives?

5. Whatadditionalrelationshipscanbeidentifiedthroughalargersamplesize?Expandingthe
samplesizecouldallowforexplorationofadditionalresearchquestions.Forexample,the
majorityofcompaniesinthisstudyaredominantinthelowerhalfoftheCVF
(Control/Compete).Inaddition,alargersamplecouldalsoinvestigatewhethersuccessis
predictedbythekindofinitiative(e.g.,emissionsreductionprojectvs.greenteamformation).

6. Whatistheimpactofcorporatesizeandscopeofinitiatives?Inthisstudy,companysizeand
engagementinsustainabilityvariedsignificantly.

7. Howdoobjectivemeasuresofsustainabilityaltertherelativesuccessoftheinitiative?Inthe
future,weexpectthatmorerobustobjectivemeasuresofsustainabilitysuccesswillexistas
environmentalaccountingsystemsimprove.Consequently,subjectivemeasurescouldbe
supplementedbyobjectivemeasuresofinitiativesuccess.

37|P a g e

SummaryandConclusion
Corporatecultureisanimportantdriveroforganizationaleffectiveness,yetlittleempiricalresearchhas
beendonetoapplythisrelationshiptothefieldofcorporateenvironmentalsustainability.Usingthe
CompetingValuesFramework,thisstudyfoundstatisticallysignificantevidenceoftherelationship
betweencompanycultureandthesuccessofenvironmentalsustainabilityinitiatives.

Inoursurveyof23companies,wefoundthatsustainabilityinitiativesaremoresuccessfulwhenthe
initiativesaredevelopedandimplementedinawaythatisgenerallyconsistentwiththecompanys
culture.Inparticular,sustainabilityinitiativesaremoresuccessfulwhentheycloselymatchthelevelof
collaborationthatoccurswithinacompany;thatis,acollaborativeinitiativeislikelytobemore
successfulinacollaborativecompany,whilealesscollaborativeinitiativeislikelytobemoresuccessful
inalesscollaborativecompany.

Thesefindingssuggestthatculturaldimensionsshouldbeconsideredwhendesigningandimplementing
sustainabilityinitiatives.Sincechangingcompanyculturerequiressustainedeffortoveralongperiodof
time,werecommendthatinitiativesshouldbeplannedandimplementedtomatchthecompanyculture
toachieveneartermsuccess.Wealsorecommendfutureresearchintotheimpactofframingonthe
successofsustainabilityinitiativesandthepredictivevalueofcompanylevelfactorssuchasincentive
plans,industry,andhistorywithenvironmentalissues.

38|P a g e

WorksCited

Barney, J. B. (1986). Organizational culture: Can it be a source of sustained competitive advantage?

The Academy of Management Review, 11(3), 656-665.
Baumgartner, R. J. (2009). Organizational culture and leadership: Preconditions for the development
of a sustainable corporation. Sustainable Development, 17(2), 102-113.
Beard, C., & Rees, S. (2000). Green teams and the management of environmental change in a UK
county council. Environmental Management and Health, 11(1), 27-38.
Bhat, V. (1996). The green corporation: The next competitive advantage. Westport, CT: Quorum
Books.
Blum-Kusterer, M., & Hussain, S. S. (2001). Innovation and corporate sustainability: An investigation
into the process of change in the pharmaceuticals industry. Business Strategy and the
Environment, 10(5), 300-316.
Boiral, O. (2005). The impact of operator involvement in pollution reduction: Case studies in Canadian
chemical companies. Business Strategy and the Environment, 14(6), 339-360.
Boiral, O. (2009). Greening the corporation through organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of
Business Ethics, 87(2), 221-236.
Brace, I. (2004). Questionnaire design: How to plan, structure and write survey material for effective
market research (Second ed.). Sterling, Va.: Kogan Page Limited.
Cameron, K. S. (1997). Techniques for making organizations effective: Some popular approaches. In
D. Druckman, J. Singer & H. Van Cott (Eds.), Enhancing organizational performance (pp. 39-64).
Washington D.C.: National Academies Press.
Cameron, K. S., & Ettingson, D. R. (1988). The conceptual foundations of organizational culture. In J.
C. Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research. Norwell, Mass.: Kluwer.
Cameron, K. S., & Freeman, S. J. (1991). Cultural congruence, strength and type: Relationships to
effectiveness. Research in Organizational Change and Development, 5, 23-58.
Cameron, K. S., & Quinn, R. E. (2006). Diagnosing and changing organizational culture: Based on the
competing values framework. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cameron, K. S., Quinn, R. E., Thakor, A., & DeGraff, J. (2006). Competing values leadership: Creating
values in organizations. Northampton, Mass.: Edward Elgar.
Carbon Trust. Carbon reduction commitment. Retrieved March 23, 2010, from
http://www.carbontrust.co.uk/policy-legislation/business-public-sector/pages/carbon-reductioncommitment.aspx
Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. The Academy
of Management Review, 4(4), 497-505.
Couillard, J., Garon, S., & Riznic, J. (2009). The logical framework approach millennium. Project
Management Journal, 40(4), 31-44.

39|P a g e

Deal, T., & Kennedy, A. (1982). Corporate cultures: The rites and rituals of corporate life. Reading,
Mass.: Addison-Wesley.
Denison, D. R., & Mishra, A. K. (1995). Toward a theory of organizational culture and effectiveness.
Organization Science, 6(2), 204-223.
Denison, D. R. (1990). Corporate culture and organizational effectiveness. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley.
Dunphy, D., & Griffiths, A. (2000). Phases in the development of corporate sustainability. 16th EGOS
Colloquium. Helsinki: European Group for Organizational Studies.
Economist Intelligence Unit. (2010). Managing for sustainability. London: Economist Intelligence Unit.
Enkvist, P., Naucler, T., & Rosander, J. (2007). A cost curve for greenhouse gas reduction. The
McKinsey Quarterly, (1), 35-45.
Environmental Defense Fund.Climate corps. Retrieved March 23, 2010, from
http://www.edf.org/page.cfm?tagID=31429
Epstein, M. J., & Roy, M. (2001). Sustainability in action: Identifying and measuring the key
performance drivers. Long Range Planning, 34, 585-604.
Fernandez, E., Junquera, B., & Ordiz, M. (2003). Organizational culture and human resources in the
environmental issue: A review of the literature. International Journal of Human Resources
Management, 14(4), 634-656.
Fiedler, F. E. (1971). Validation and extension of the contingency model of leadership effectiveness: A
review of empirical findings. Psychological Bulletin, 76(2), 128-148.
Florida, R. (1996). Lean and green: The move to environmentally conscious manufacturing. California
Management Review, 39, 80-105.
Gladwin, T. N. (1993). The meaning of greening: A plea for organizational theory. In K. Fischer, & J.
Schot (Eds.), Environmental strategies for industry (pp. 37-61). Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
GreenBiz Executive Network. (2009). Structured for sustainability. GreenBiz.com.
Griffiths, A., & Petrick, J. A. (2001). Corporate architectures for sustainability. International Journal of
Operations & Production Management, 21(12), 1573-1585.
Hanna, M. D., Newman, W. R., & Johnson, P. (2000). Linking operational and environmental
improvement through employee involvement. International Journal of Operations and Production
Management, 20(2), 148-165.
Harris, M., Chu Baird, M., & Crystal, J. (2008). Climate corps handbook. San Francisco: Environmental
Defense Fund.
Hersey, P., Blanchard, K. H., & Johnson, D. E. (1977). Management of organizational behavior:
Utilizing human resources. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall.
Hoffman, A. (1999). The importance of organizational change management for environmental decision
making. In K. Sexton, & A. Marcus (Eds.), Better environmental decisions (pp. 245-266).
Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

40|P a g e

Hoffman, A. (2000). Competitive environmental strategy. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

Hoffman, A. (2005). Business decision and the environment: Significance, challenges, and momentum
of an emerging research field. Decision making for the environment (pp. 209-229)
Hooijberg, R., & Petrock, F. (1993). On cultural change: Using the competing values framework to
help leaders execute a transformational strategy. Human Resource Management, 32(1), 29-50.
Hunt, C. B., & Auster, E. R. (1990). Proactive environmental management: Avoiding the toxic trap.
Sloan Management Review, 31(2), 7-18.
Hutchinson, C. (1996). Integrating environment policy with business strategy. Long Range Planning,
29(1), 11-23.
Ika, L. A. (2009). Project success as a topic in project management journals. Project Management
Journal, 40(4), 6-19.
International Institute for Sustainable Development, Deloitte & Touche, World Business Council for
Sustainable Development (WBCSD). (1992). Business strategy for the 90s. Manitoba: IISD.
Kalliath, T. J., Bluedorn, A. C., & Gillespie, D. F. (1999). A confirmatory factor analysis of the
competing values instrument. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59(1), 143.
Kallio, T. J., & Nordberg, P. (2006). The evolution of organizations and natural environment discourse:
Some critical remarks. Organization & Environment, 19(4), 439.
Kenber, M., Haugen, O., & Cobb, M. (2009). The effects of EU climate legislation on business
competitiveness: A survey and analysis. The German Marshall Fund of the United States.
Klassen, R. D. (2000). Exploring the linkage between investment in manufacturing and environmental
technologies. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 20(2), 127-147.
Kleine, A., & von Hauff, M. (2009) Sustainability-driven implementation of corporate social
responsibility: Application of the integrative sustainability triangle. Journal of Business Ethics,
(85), 1-17.
Lester, S., & Kickul, J. (2001). Psychological contracts in the 21st century: What employees value
most and how well organizations are responding to these expectations. Human Resource
Planning, 24(1), 10-21.
Macey, W., & Schneider, B. (2008). The meaning of employee engagement. Industrial and
Organizational Psychology, (1), 3-30.
Maon, F., Lindgreen, A., & Swaen, V. (2009). Designing and implementing corporate social
responsibility: An integrative framework grounded in theory and practice. Journal of Business
Ethics, 87, 71-89.
Marrewijk, M. V., & Becker, H. M. (2004). The hidden hand of cultural governance: The transformation
process of Humanitas, a community-driven organization providing, cure, care, housing and wellbeing to elderly people. Journal of Business Ethics, 55(2), 205-214.
Maxwell, J., Rothenberg, S., Briscoe, F., & Marcus, A. (1997). Green schemes: Corporate
environmental strategies and their implementation. California Management Review, 39, 118-134.

41|P a g e

Montiel, I. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and corporate sustainability: Separate pasts,
common futures. Organization & Environment, 21(3), 245.
Net impact issues in depth calls. Retrieved March 12, 2010, from
http://www.netimpact.org/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=1057
Nike, Inc. Nike reuse-A-shoe. Retrieved March 16, 2010, from http://www.nikereuseashoe.com/
Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A
meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24(3), 403.
Pacific Gas and Electric.The future of SmartMeter technology. Retrieved March 16, 2010, from
http://www.pge.com/myhome/customerservice/meter/smartmeter/future/index.shtml
Panayotopoulou, L., Bouranta, D., & Papalexandris, N. (2003). Strategic human resource management
and its effects on firm performance: An implementation of the competing values framework.
International Journal of Human Resources Management, 14(4), 680-699.
Polonsky, M., Zeffane, R., & Medley, P. (1992). Corporate environmental commitment in Australia: A
sectorial comparison. Business Strategy and the Environment, 1(2), 25-39.
Post, J., & Altman, B. (1994). Managing the environmental change process: Barriers and
opportunities. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 7(4), 64-81.
Ramus, C. A., & Steger, U. (2000). The roles of supervisory support behaviors and environmental
policy in employee" ecoinitiatives" at leading-edge European companies. The Academy of
Management Journal, 43(4), 605-626.
Robinson, S. (1996). Trust and breach of the psychological contract. Administrative Science Quarterly,
41(4), 574-599.
Schaltegger, S. (1997). Economics of life cycle assessment: Inefficiency of the present approach.
Business Strategy and the Environment, 6(1), 1-8.
Schein, E. H. (1985). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Schn, D. A. (1971). Beyond the stable state. New York: Random House.
Sharma, S., & Vredenburg, H. (1998). Proactive corporate environmental strategy and the
development of competitively valuable organizational capabilities. Strategic Management Journal,
19(8), 729-753.
Shepstone, C., & Currie, L. (2006). Assessing organizational culture: Moving towards organizational
change and renewal. Library assessment conference (pp. 369-379) Retrieved from
http://hdl.Handle.net/10388/211
Starik, M., & Rands, G. (1995). Weaving an integrated web: Multilevel and multisystem perspectives
of ecologically sustainable organizations. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 908-935.
Steger, U., & Meima, R. (1998). The strategic dimensions of environmental management: Sustaining
the corporation during the age of ecological discovery. London: Macmillan.
The Clorox Company.Green works press kit. Retrieved March 21, 2010, from
http://www.greenworkspresskit.com/

42|P a g e

Tilt, C. A. (2006). Linking environmental action and environmental disclosure in an organisational

change framework. Journal of Accounting and Organizational Change, 2(1), 4-24.
doi:10.1108/18325910610654108
Trice, H. M., & Beyer, J. M. (1993). The cultures of work organizations. Engelwood Cliffs, N. J.:
Prentice-Hall.
Turnley, W., & Feldman, D. (2000). Re-examining the effects of psychological contract violations:
Unmet expectations and job dissatisfaction as mediators. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
21(1), 25-42.
Van Marrewijk, M., & Werre, M. (2003). Multiple levels of corporate sustainability. Journal of Business
Ethics, 44(2), 107-119.
Vault guide to green programs (2009). New York: Vault.com, Inc. Retrieved from Vault Career Insider
Walsh, J. P., Weber, K., & Margolis, J. D. (2003). Social issues and management: Our lost cause
found. Journal of Management, 29(6), 859-881.
Werbach, A. (2009). Strategy for sustainability: A business manifesto. Boston: Harvard Business
Press.
Wilkins, A. L. (1983). The culture audit: A tool for understanding organizations. Organizational
Dynamics, 12(2), 24-38.
Wilson, A. M. (2001). Understanding organisational culture and the implications for corporate
marketing. European Journal of Marketing, 35(3/4), 353-367.
Wondolleck, J. M., & Yaffee, S. L. (2000). Making collaboration work. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Yazici, H. J. (2009). The role of project management maturity and organizational culture in perceived
performance. Project Management Journal, 40(3), 14-33.
Ytterhus, B. E. (1997). The greening of industry with a focus on eco-efficiency: The concept, a case
and some evidence. 13th EGOS Colloquium. Budapest: European Group for Organizational
Studies.

43|P a g e

Appendices
AppendixA:SampleLeadSurvey

44|P a g e

45|P a g e

46|P a g e

47|P a g e

48|P a g e

AppendixB:SampleTeamSurvey
[SeenoticeofconsentfromLeadSurvey]

49|P a g e

50|P a g e

51|P a g e

52|P a g e

53|P a g e

54|P a g e

55|P a g e

56|P a g e

AppendixC:CompanyEngagementMaterials
ProjectMarketing

57|P a g e

SampleSolicitationLetter

Hi[Contact]

Mynameis[Liason],andIamwritingonbehalfoftheErbInstituteandtheSchoolofNaturalResources
andEnvironmentattheUniversityofMichigan.Igotyourcontactinformationfrom[Contact],who
mentionedthatyoumighthavesomeinterestinresearchthatImcurrentlyconducting.Iampartofa
MBA/MSgraduatestudentteamthatisresearchingtheimpactthatcompanyculturehasontheefficacy
ofsustainabilityinitiatives.Ithinkhemayhaveforwardedthedetails,butjustincaseheressome
backgroundonthestudy:

BenefitstoParticipants
Ourendgoalistohelpcompaniesbetterunderstandtheimpactthattheirculturehasontheir
sustainabilityinitiativesandprovideprescriptiveguidanceforapproachingsuchinitiativesmost
effectively.Allcompanyinformationwillremainanonymousandwillbeusedinaggregatefordata
analysis.Fromthisresearch,youwouldreceiveauniquesustainabilitycultureprofileandsummaryof
howyoursustainabilityinitiativesrelatetothisprofile.Wewouldalsobegladtosendyouacopyofour
finalreport.

OurAreaofInterest
Nomatterhowwellintentionedorwellorganizedasustainabilityplanmaybe,manysustainability
initiativesfailtogaintractionwithincompanies.Webelievethatpartoftheanswertothisproblemmay
lieinorganizationalculture.Ourreviewofindustryandacademicliteraturehasidentifiedagapinthe
researchonorganizationalcultureanditsimpactontheeffectivenessofsustainabilityinitiatives.The
purposeofourstudyistoaddressthisgap.Inparticular,wehopethattheresultsofthissurveywill
improveunderstandingoftheorganizationalcultureandcharacteristicsthathelpcompaniesfind
successinachievingtheirsustainabilitygoals.

OurRequest
Wewouldlikeyourhelpcompletinga1520minuteonlinesurvey,designedtohelpusidentifyand
assesscorporatesustainabilityinitiativesandtherelationshipofsuchinitiativestobroadercompany
culture.Thesurveyisdesignedtobecompletedby10employeeswithinyourcompanywho(1)have
somefamiliaritywithyoursustainabilityinitiatives,and(2)representasmanyofthedepartments
involvedinthedesignandimplementationofsustainabilityinitiativesaspossible.Asafirststep,one
personveryfamiliarwiththecompanyssustainabilityinitiativeswillfilloutasinglepreliminary510
minutesurveyidentifyingtheinitiatives.

YourResponse
Ifyouareinterestedinparticipatinginthisexcitingresearch,pleaserespondtomeatyourearliest
convenience.Iwouldbemorethanhappytoansweranyquestionsyoumayhave.Icanbereached
directlyviaemailorphoneasfollows:

Email:uniquename@umich.edu
Phone:xxxxxxxxxx

Youcanreachanymemberofourteamatthefollowingaddress:SustainabilitySuccess@umich.edu

ThankyouinadvanceforyourconsiderationandIlookforwardtoyourresponse.
58|P a g e

SampleLeadSurveyEmail

Hi[Contact],

Thanksagainforyourtimethismorning.HereisthelinktoSurvey1withinstructions:

Instructions
Step1.Thisisthefirstof2surveysyouwillreceive.Forthefirstsurvey,youwillbetheonlypersontofill
itout.Complete"Survey1"usingthelinkbelow(thisshouldtake1015minutes).Inthissurveyyouwill
provideinformationaboutsustainabilityinitiativesatyourcompany.Ifpossible,pleasecompletethe
surveyby[date].

[Link]

Step2.OnceSurvey1iscompleted,Iwillthensendyouacustomizedsurveybasedonyourresponses.
PleaseforwardthisSurvey2"to1520peoplethatarefamiliarwiththesustainability
projects/initiativesat[Company](e.g.,helpedtoplan,implement,manage,etc).Oncewehavereceived
10responsestoSurvey2[Company]qualifiestoparticipateinthestudy,andIwillcontactyouatthat
pointtoconfirmparticipation.

TheteamandIwillthenanalyzethedataandgeneratethecompanyspecificandoverallstudyreports.
Oncethosearecomplete,Iwillsendyouthereportsandwewillbeavailabletodiscussanyquestionsor
commentsyoumayhave.

Ifneeded,youmayexitandreenterthesurveybyclickingontheExitthisSurveybuttonintheupper
rightcornerofeachpagewhenyoudothis,youranswerswillbeautomaticallysaved.Additional
instructionsareprovidedinthesurvey.

FollowUp
Onthesurvey,youwillhavetheoptiontorequestacopyofourfinalreport(expectedcompletion
Spring2010).Basedonthesurveyresponses,wemaybereachingouttoselectcompaniesthatwe
identifyasbestinclassformoreindepthqualitativestudyviaphoneinterview.

Ifatanytimeyouhavequestions,pleasedonthesitatetocontactme.Thankyouagainforyour
participation!

59|P a g e

SampleTeamSurveyEmail
Hi[Contact],

ThankyouforcompletingtheLeadSurvey.Wehavecreatedacustomized[Company]TeamSurveyand
includedalinkwithinstructionsbelow.

Pleasesendthissurveyto1520peopleinyourcompanythatarefamiliarwiththesustainability
projects/initiativesat[Company](e.g.,theyareonthegreenteamand/ortheyhelpedtoplan,approve,
implement,ormanagesustainabilityinitiatives).Thetwoinitiativesselectedforthesurveyare:

#1[Initiative1]
Goal(s)ofInitiative:Leveragesustainabilityintheideationprocess.
BriefDescription:Traininnovationteamstobuildsustainabilityprinciplesintoconceptdevelopment
process.

#2[Initiative2]
Goal(s)ofInitiative:Improverawmaterialsandpackcomponentsenvironmentally.
BriefDescription:Classificationsystemforrawmaterialsandpackagingcomponents.

Oncewehavereceivedatleast10responses,[Company]qualifiestoparticipateinthestudy.Thanks
again!

OnbehalfofaresearchteamattheUniversityofMichigan,Iinviteyoutoparticipateina
groundbreakingresearchstudyonsustainabilityandorganizationalculture.Wethankyouinadvancefor
yourinsights,whichwillbeaggregatedwithotherrespondentsfrom[Company]andcompaniesacross
thecountrytoassesstheimpactthatcompanyculturehasontheefficacyofsustainabilityinitiatives.

Ourendgoalistodrawontheresultsofthissurvey,whichwearesendingtoapproximately150
companies,tocreateadiagnostictoolthathelpscompaniesbetterunderstandtheimpactthattheir
culturehasontheirsustainabilityinitiatives.Thistoolcouldthenprovideprescriptiveguidancefor
approachingsuchinitiatives.

Instructions
Thissurveyisbeingcompletedbyapproximately1520employeeswhoareinvolvedwithsustainability
initiativesat[Company].Inthissurvey,whichwilltake1520minutestocomplete,youwillprovide
informationaboutyourcompanyingeneralaswellasaboutyourcompanyssustainabilityinitiatives.All
responsesareanonymousandwillbeaggregatedforanalysis.Additionalinstructionsareprovidedinthe
survey.Alinktothesurveyisbelow.

PleasecompletethesurveybyWed,Feb3rd.
Hereisthelinkto[Company]survey:[Link]

Ifatanytimeyouhavequestions,pleasefeelfreetocontactme:
Email:uniquename@umich.edu
Phone:xxxxxxxxxx

Thankyouforyourparticipation!

60|P a g e

AppendixD:OverviewofParticipatingCompanies
Thesampleofcompaniesrepresentedavarietyofsizes,industries,andownershipstructures.Ofthose
respondingtothesurvey,58percentarepubliclyheldand42percentareprivatelyheld.Inthefinal
sample,participatingcompaniesweregenerallylargeinsize,withthemajorityover10,000employees
and83percentwithsalesmorethanUS$1Bannually.

Thefollowingisabreakdownofcompanysizebynumberofemployees:
999orfewer:4
1,0009,999:6
10,000or49,999:4
50,000or99,999:6
Greaterthan100,000:3

Companiesalsorepresentedadiversesetofindustries:
ChemicalManufacturing
ApparelandAccessories
AutoandTruckParts
BusinessServices
ChemicalsPlasticsandRubber
ComputerHardware
ComputerServices
ElectricUtilities
FoodProcessing
ForestryandWoodProducts
FurnitureandFixtures
MetalMining
MotionPictures
OfficeSupplies
PersonalandHouseholdProducts
Restaurants
Retail(Grocery)
Retail(Specialty)
Semiconductors
TextilesNonApparel

61|P a g e

AppendixE:StudyDatabase

Legend
Black Text
Red Text
Blue Text
Blue Fill
White Fill

- Survey data
- Calculated field
- Secondary research
- Dataset used in analysis
- Supporting data
- One to many relationship

Company (Level 2)

Initiative-Person (Level 1)

company_id
name
ROI
emp_size
public
comp_coop
cp_ave_y
cp_ave_g
cp_ave_b
cp_ave_y
cp_max_y
cp_max_g
cp_max_b
cp_max_y

company_id
person_id
int_order
p_worth 2
diff_y_a
diff_g_a
diff_b_a
diff_r_a
diff_tot

Person_Company_Detail

Person_Initiative _Detail

company_id
person_id
name
title
division /business unit
years with company
relationship to initiative
company cooperation level
culture question1 (A, B, C, D)
culture question 2 (A, B, C, D)
culture question 3 (A, B, C, D)
culture question 4 (A, B, C, D)
company culture comments

62|P a g e

person_id
initiative question 1 (A, B, C, D)
initiative question 2 (A, B, C, D)
initiative question 3 (A, B, C, D)
initiative question 4 (A, B, C, D)
success - overall worth
success - environmental impact
success - financial impact
success - employee impact
initiative comments

AppendixF:DataDictionaryforVariablesUsedinAnalysis

Field Name

Level

Description

company_id

2& 1

Unique identifier for participating companies

comp_coop

5 point Likert scale. Level of cooperation across departments, as assessed

by employees and averaged across all respondents at a given company.

emp_size

Number of employees at the company.

public

Flag for whether the company is a public company.

ROI

5 point Likert scale. Degree to which ROI is used to inform company

initiative decisions, as assessed by employees and averaged across all
respondents at a given company.

cp_y_max

Dummy variable indicating if the Collaborate quadrant is the highest

quadrant for the company.

cp_g_max

Dummy variable indicating if the Create quadrant is the highest quadrant for
the company.

cp_b_max

Dummy variable indicating if the Compete quadrant is the highest quadrant

for the company.

cp_r_max

Dummy variable indicating if the Control quadrant is the highest quadrant

for the company.

person_id

Unique identifier for individual survey respondents

p_worth2

4 point Likert scale. Please rate to what extent you agree or disagree with
the following statements about Initiative I think this initiative was worth
doing. (1 = disagree, 4 = strongly agree).

diff_y_a

The absolute value of difference between the initiative profile and company
culture profile in the Collaborate quadrant, averaged across all individuals at
a given company.

diff_g_a

The absolute value of difference between the initiative profile and company
culture profile in the Create quadrant, averaged across all individuals at a
given company.

diff_b_a

The absolute value of difference between the initiative profile and company
culture profile in the Compete quadrant, averaged across all individuals at a
given company.

diff_r_a

The absolute value of difference between the initiative profile and company
culture profile in the Control quadrant, averaged across all individuals at a
given company.

diff_tot

The absolute value of difference between the initiative profile and company
culture profile in the Create quadrant averaged across all individuals at a
given company.

63|P a g e