Browsing by Author "Dzhengiz, Tulin"

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 7 of 7
  • Bridging the gap: organisational value frames and sustainable alliance portfolios
    (2020-10-19) Dzhengiz, Tulin
     A2 Katsausartikkeli tieteellisessä aikakauslehdessä
    Research on sustainability-oriented partnerships focused either on inter-firm or cross-sector partnerships separately and often took the partnership as a level of analysis. As opposed to the partnership level, the firm-level analysis that investigates portfolios of sustainability-oriented partnerships were brought forward by only a few studies. By drawing on the literature of alliance portfolios, this paper builds the notion of “sustainable alliance portfolio” further to move scholarly attention towards the bigger picture of firms’ partnership efforts for sustainability. Taking stock on the research that introduced organisational cognition to corporate sustainability which showed how partners’ value frames co-evolve, converge, diverge or fuse over time; this paper theorises how business case and paradoxical frames impact the configuration, management and development of sustainable alliance portfolios. Overall, this paper bridges the gap between two constructs-organisational value frames and sustainable alliance portfolios- and offers propositions for future research to draw attention to the under-theorised portfolios of sustainability-oriented partnerships.
  • Dogmatic, instrumental and paradoxical frames: A pragmatic research framework for studying organizational sustainability
    (2022-10) Dzhengiz, Tulin; Hockerts, Kai
     A1 Alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä aikakauslehdessä
    Our purpose is to develop a comprehensive categorization of organizational sustainability frames. This is necessary because a unified approach that considers the organizational sustainability frames of different organizations (FPOs, NPOs and hybrids) is absent in the extant research. Towards this end, we undertake an integrative review of 158 articles and identify seven frames based on three objective functions: maximization of economic capital, maintaining natural capital and creating social impact. Of the seven, three are dogmatic, each accepting only one objective function as legitimate: economic, natural and social capital; three are instrumental, with one objective function as the ultimate goal and the others as necessary means; and the last one is paradoxical, where tensions between objective functions are accommodated simultaneously rather than eliminated. We contribute to the literature by introducing the 'dogmatic frame' category to the ongoing conversation on organizational sustainability frames. We also contribute by demonstrating that instrumental frames exist not only at for-profit organizations but also at non-profits and hybrid organizations. Consequently, we link the conversation in these areas with that of organizational sustainability frames. Finally, we problematize the growing attention on the paradoxical frame by discussing its suitability in different contexts and situations.
  • Emotional framing of NGO press releases: Reformative versus radical NGOs
    (2021-07) Dzhengiz, Tulin; Barkemeyer, Ralf; Napolitano, Giulio
     A1 Alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä aikakauslehdessä
    Drawing on the literature on framing, we explore the emotional framing differences in radical and reformative NGOs over time. We analyse the sentiment of a sample of 5880 press releases issued by five NGOs positioned differently on the reformative-radical spectrum and examine how they address large companies. Our findings reveal an increasing polarisation of sentiment in these NGOs' framing, with individual NGOs gravitating towards ideal-type radical or reformative positions, respectively. In alignment with the differences in their framing, we observe differences in their approaches to cross-sector partnerships. Policymakers need to note the implications of the observed polarisation for the effectiveness and credibility of cross-sector partnerships and multi-stakeholder initiatives more generally, given the risk of co-optation (for reformative NGOs) as well as the risk of foregoing significant funding and governance opportunities (for radical NGOs).
  • A Literature Review of Inter-Organizational Sustainability Learning
    (2020-06-01) Dzhengiz, Tulin
     A2 Katsausartikkeli tieteellisessä aikakauslehdessä
    Sustainable development goals (SDGs) have become increasingly important for today’s firms as they build sustainability strategies that integrate SDGs into their core activities. Addressing these goals collaboratively, in line with SDG 17—partnerships for the goals, has gained momentum, hence the growing literature on sustainability-oriented partnerships. However, addressing SDGs through partnerships is not straightforward. For firms, contributing to SDGs through alliances and partnerships requires building environmental capabilities and embracing new value frames; in other words, going through the complex process of inter-organizational learning. This paper reviews the literature on sustainability-oriented partnerships with a focus on the inter-organizational learning process. As a result of the review, a model of inter-organizational sustainability learning is presented. This model captures the di erent levels and types of the inter-organizational learning process; partner and partnership characteristics that impact learning; the environmental conditions that set the conditions for learning to take place; the catalyst and inhibitors of learning; and finally outcomes of learning. This model expands and re-organizes the existing scholarly conversation about inter-organizational learning in the context of sustainability-oriented alliances and partnerships and o ers a learning-based understanding of sustainability partnerships to practitioners. Based on the review, the paper proposes ideas for future research and contributes to the development of a future research agenda in the area of sustainability-oriented alliances and partnerships.
  • The role of cross-sector partnerships in the dynamics between places and innovation ecosystems
    (2024-03) Dzhengiz, Tulin; Patala, Samuli
     A1 Alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä aikakauslehdessä
    The dynamics between places and innovation ecosystems and the role that cross-sector partnerships (CSPs) can play in regenerating places and in revitalizing innovation ecosystems remain poorly theorized. In this study we use two cases – Humber (UK) and Southwest Finland – to develop a conceptual model that demonstrates the vicious and virtuous dynamics between places and innovation ecosystems. We show that CSPs can act as herding spaces – arenas where actors from different organizations get together to address a common purpose and connect with the institutional context – and alter these vicious and virtuous dynamics. Specifically, our findings shed light on four mechanisms that enable CSPs to act as herding spaces and so to help break away from the vicious (vitalizing role) and reinforce the virtuous (nurturing role) dynamics between places and innovation ecosystems: recognition of place-based challenges, improvement or utilization of place attachment, development of purpose ecosystems, and direct engagement in place regeneration activities.
  • (Un)Sustainable transitions towards fast and ultra-fast fashion
    (2023-12) Dzhengiz, Tulin; Haukkala, Teresa; Sahimaa, Olli
     A2 Katsausartikkeli tieteellisessä aikakauslehdessä
    Due to pressing sustainability challenges, the fashion industry is undergoing tremendous change. Surprisingly, even though the unique context of fashion presents an opportunity for scholars to explore the (un)sustainable transitions, this context has yet to receive the attention of transition scholars. Our article explores fashion transitions and develops a conceptual framework demonstrating this transition's multi-level and multi-dimensional interactions. We draw on three literature areas: multi-level perspective (MLP) of sustainable transitions, institutional logics and framing contests. We then introduce a conceptual framework and illustrative examples from the industry and demonstrate the tensions between positive and negative environmental and socialsustainability developments at the niche, regime and landscape levels. We show that while many positive developments can be seen in the regime players through the adoption of corporate sustainability initiatives, new business models and collaborations, more attention should also be given to some adverse developments. Overall, we contribute to the literature by exploring fashion transitions, an under-explored context, and by demonstrating the complexity of interactions due to the diffusion of heterogeneous institutional logics and framing contests between players.
  • Unpacking the circular economy: A problematizing review
    (2023-04) Dzhengiz, Tulin; Miller, Elizabeth M.; Ovaska, Jukka Pekka; Patala, Samuli
     A1 Alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä aikakauslehdessä
    Transitioning to a circular economy (CE) model has been proposed to solve many grand environmental challenges. While research on CE has been extensively reviewed, less is known about the implicit underlying assumptions of this work. Understanding these assumptions is critical as they typically go unchallenged yet play a significant role in shaping research fields. In this paper we conduct a problematizing review to critically analyse and make explicit the in-house, root metaphor and ideological assumptions that inform the framing of CE. Firstly, we demonstrate various in-house assumptions about CE, such as an emphasis on the business case for CE and the relationship between CE and corporate sustainability. Secondly, root metaphor assumptions include circularity and industrial relationships resembling biological metabolisms. Finally, the dominant ideological assumptions-neoliberalism and ecological modernization-guide scholarly thinking about growth, consumption and profit maximization. Based on our analysis and drawing on the ongoing CE debates within broader environmental studies, we suggest new agendas for future research. We contribute to the growing literature on CE in business, management and organization studies by identifying assumptions that may be misleading or limiting for future CE research, as well as to the conversations on grand challenges by discussing the implications of how challenges and solutions are framed.