Home⇛International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research⇛vol. 4 no. 8 (2023)

A Case Study on Philippine Sustainable Enterprises Aligned with the Quantum Sustainable Organizing Theory (QSOT)

Angelique C. Blasa Cheng | Rhett M. Chiu | Catherine M. Dy | Su Jin Kim | Paul D. Trono | Raymond Allan G. Vergara | Patrick Adiel H. Aure

 

Abstract:

The research aims to build on Dyck and Greidanus’ (2016) study on the Quantum Sustainable Organizing Theory (QSOT) by analyzing Philippine sustainable enterprises and how they adopt and execute the principles of QSOT into their organization. The data gathered from the multiple-case study were collated and used to promote sustainability and build knowledge on the contemporary theory. The research utilized a qualitative embedded multiple-case study design in investigating the exhibition of QSOT in Philippine sustainable enterprises. Through in-depth interviews with three (3) Philippine sustainable enterprises or potentially QSOT organizations, the paper identified and illustrated QSOT-aligned business practices, operations, and functions. Among the three Philippine sustainable enterprises studied, two were identified as fully QSOT-oriented companies. The researchers note that QSOT can be operationalized in the country; however, the success of adoption and integration is dependent on the industry, ability to innovate the business structure, entanglement of “external” entities, and financial capacity. The study framed sustainable organizing practices in a manner that is concrete and specific—practices that enhance social and ecological wellbeing were elaborated. As the Quantum Sustainable Organizing Theory (QSOT) is a contemporary theory, more research is needed to understand the concept, especially in the Philippine context.



References:

  1. Banerjee, S., & Arjalies, D. (2021). Celebrating the end of enlightenment: Organization theory in the age of the anthropocene and gaia (and why neither is the solution to our ecological crisis) https://doi.org/10.1177/26317877211036714
  2. Blonkowski, N., Jones, D., Naik, S. & Raman, S. (2014). The value of the sustainable sup-ply chain: what do consumers think? Re-trieved from http://www.accenture.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/PDF/Accenture-The-Value-of-the-Sustainable-Supply-Chain.pdf
  3. Bradshaw, C., Ehrlich, P., Beattie, A., Ceballos, G. Crist, E., Diamond, J., & Blumstein, D. (2020). Underestimating the challenges of avoiding a ghastly future. Frontiers in Conservation Science. 1. 615419. 10.3389/fcosc.2020.615419
  4. Carpenter, S. (2002). Ecological futures: Build-ing an ecology of the long now. https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[2069:EFBAEO]2.0.CO;2
  5. Deng, X., Kang, J.K., & Low, B.S., (2013). Cor-porate social responsibility and stake-holder value maximization: Evidence from mergers. J. Financ. Econ. 110 (1), 87e109.
  6. Dentoni, D., Pinkse, J., & Lubberink, R. (2020). Linking sustainable business models to socio-ecological resilience through cross-sector partnerships: a complex adaptive systems view. Business & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650320935015.
  7. Dyck, B., & Greidanus, N. (2016). Quantum sus-tainable organizing theory: A study of or-ganization theory as if matter mattered. Journal of Management Inquiry, 1-15. DOI: 10.1177/1056492616656407
  8. Francis, P. (2015). On care for our common home. Rome: Vatican Press. http://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/fran-cesco/pdf/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si_en.pdf
  9. Iver, J. (2007). Organizational ecology: A theo-retical framework for examining collabo-rative partnerships. 31(4), 7-19. https://doi.org/10.1300/J147v31n04_03
  10. Kiron, D., Kruschwitz, N., Rubel, H.; Reeves, M., & Fuisz-Kehrbach, S.K. (2014). Sustaina-bility’s next frontier: Walking the talk on the sustainability issues that matter most. http://sloanreview.mit.edu/projects/sustainabilitys-next-frontier/
  11. Lewis, K. V., Cassells, S., & Roxas, H. (2015). SMEs and the potential for collaborative path to environmental responsibility. Business Strategy And the Environment, 24(8), 750–764. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1843
  12. Meima, R., & Welford, R. (2016). The ecologi-cal challenge in organization theory and organizational behavior. 6(2), 3-8. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315825113
  13. Nguyen, D. K., & Slater, S. F. (2010). Hitting the sustainability sweet spot: having it all. Journal of Business Strategy, 31(3), 5-11. doi 10.1108/02756661011036655
  14. Osterwalder, A., and Y. Pigneur. (2010). Busi-ness Model Generation: A Handbook for Visionaries, Game Changers, and Chal-lengers. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
  15. Popper, K. (1982). The Open Universe: An ar-gument for indeterminism. Routledge. ISBN 0-415-07865-2
  16. Roxas, B., & Chadee, D. (2012). Environmental sustainability orientation and financial resources of small manufacturing firms in the Philippines. Social Responsibility Journal, 8(2), 208-226. https://doi.org/10.1108/17471111211234842
  17. Roxas, H., Ashill, N., & Chadee, D. (2015). Ef-fects of entrepreneurial and environmen-tal sustainability orientations on firm
  18. performance: A study of small businesses in the Philippines. Journal of Small Busi-ness Management. Forthcoming. 10.1111/jsbm.12259.
  19. Savitz, A.W. & Weber, K. (2006), The triple bottom line: How today’s best-run com-panies are achieving economic, social, and environmental success – and how you can too, Jossey-Bass, Hoboken, NJ.
  20. Schrödinger, E. (1935). Discussion of probabil-ity relations between separated systems. Mathematical Proceedings of the Cam-bridge Philosophical Society, 31(4), 555-563. doi:10.1017/S0305004100013554
  21. Shepherd, D. A. & Patzelt, H. (2011). The new field of sustainable entrepreneurship: Studying entrepreneurial action linking “what is to be sustained” with “what is to be developed. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, January, 35(1), 137-163. doi 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00426.x
  22. Sparviero, S. (2019). The Case for a Socially Oriented Business Model Canvas: The So-cial ENterprise Model Canvas, Journal of Social ENtrepreneurship, DOI: 10.1080/19420676.2018.1541011.
  23. Tsalis, T. A., Nikolaou, I. E., Grigoroudis, E., & Tsagarakis, K. P. (2013). A framework development to evaluate the needs of SMEs in order to adopt a sustainability-balanced scorecard. Journal of Integra-tive Environmental Sciences, 10(3–4), 179–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/1943815X.2013.858751
  24. Why brands and retailers are running with the ‘slow fashion’ movement. (2020). Forbes. http://www.forbes.com/sites/aliciaadamczyk/2014/11/20/why-brands-and-retailers-are-running-withthe-slow-fashion-movement/#1b1266906505
  25. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th Ed.). California: SAGE Publications, Inc. ISBN 978-1-4129-6099-1
  26. Young, C. & Tilley, Fiona. (2006). Can busi-nesses move beyond efficiency? The shift towards effectiveness and equity in the corporate sustainability debate. Business Strategy and the Environment. 15. 402-415. 10.1002/bse.510.

Tools


Copyright © 2024  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic