Abstract
Even though organizational researchers have acknowledged the role of social and environmental business practices in contributing to organizational resilience, this work remains scarce, possibly because of the difficulties in measuring organizational resilience. In this paper, we aim to partly remedy this issue by measuring two ways in which organizational resilience manifests through organizational outcomes in a generalized environmental disturbance—namely, severity of loss, which captures the stability dimension of resilience, and time to recovery, which captures the flexibility dimension. By isolating these two variables, we can then theorize the types of social and environmental practices that contribute to resilience. Specifically, we argue that strategic social and environmental practices contribute more to organizational resilience than do tactical social and environmental practices. We test our theory by analyzing the responses of 963 U.S.-based firms to the global financial crisis and find evidence that support our hypotheses.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1434-1460 |
| Number of pages | 27 |
| Journal | Journal of Management |
| Volume | 45 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Apr 1 2019 |
Fingerprint
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Finance
- Strategy and Management
Cite this
}
Bouncing Back : Building Resilience Through Social and Environmental Practices in the Context of the 2008 Global Financial Crisis. / DesJardine, Mark; Bansal, Pratima; Yang, Yang.
In: Journal of Management, Vol. 45, No. 4, 01.04.2019, p. 1434-1460.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
TY - JOUR
T1 - Bouncing Back
T2 - Building Resilience Through Social and Environmental Practices in the Context of the 2008 Global Financial Crisis
AU - DesJardine, Mark
AU - Bansal, Pratima
AU - Yang, Yang
PY - 2019/4/1
Y1 - 2019/4/1
N2 - Even though organizational researchers have acknowledged the role of social and environmental business practices in contributing to organizational resilience, this work remains scarce, possibly because of the difficulties in measuring organizational resilience. In this paper, we aim to partly remedy this issue by measuring two ways in which organizational resilience manifests through organizational outcomes in a generalized environmental disturbance—namely, severity of loss, which captures the stability dimension of resilience, and time to recovery, which captures the flexibility dimension. By isolating these two variables, we can then theorize the types of social and environmental practices that contribute to resilience. Specifically, we argue that strategic social and environmental practices contribute more to organizational resilience than do tactical social and environmental practices. We test our theory by analyzing the responses of 963 U.S.-based firms to the global financial crisis and find evidence that support our hypotheses.
AB - Even though organizational researchers have acknowledged the role of social and environmental business practices in contributing to organizational resilience, this work remains scarce, possibly because of the difficulties in measuring organizational resilience. In this paper, we aim to partly remedy this issue by measuring two ways in which organizational resilience manifests through organizational outcomes in a generalized environmental disturbance—namely, severity of loss, which captures the stability dimension of resilience, and time to recovery, which captures the flexibility dimension. By isolating these two variables, we can then theorize the types of social and environmental practices that contribute to resilience. Specifically, we argue that strategic social and environmental practices contribute more to organizational resilience than do tactical social and environmental practices. We test our theory by analyzing the responses of 963 U.S.-based firms to the global financial crisis and find evidence that support our hypotheses.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85061587144&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85061587144&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/0149206317708854
DO - 10.1177/0149206317708854
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85061587144
VL - 45
SP - 1434
EP - 1460
JO - Journal of Management
JF - Journal of Management
SN - 0149-2063
IS - 4
ER -