Greening from within: the role of organisational purpose shift in building internal legitimacy for fossil fuel incumbents’ green innovation

References

• Andersen, A. D., and M. Gulbrandsen. 2020. “The Innovation and Industry Dynamics of Technology Phase-Out in Sustainability Transitions: Insights from Diversifying Petroleum Technology Suppliers in Norway.” Energy Research & Social Science 64:101447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101447.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Araújo, R., and M. Franco. 2021. “The Use of Collaboration Networks in Search of Eco-Innovation: A Systematic Literature Review.” Journal of Cleaner Production 314:127975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127975.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barbieri, N., A. Marzucchi, and U. Rizzo. 2020. “Knowledge Sources and Impacts on Subsequent Inventions: Do Green Technologies Differ from Non-Green Ones?” Research Policy 49 (2): 103901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2019.103901.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnard, C. 1938. Functions of the Executive. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Berle, A., and G. Means. 1932. The Modern Corporate and Private Property. New York: Commerce Clearing House.
   Google Scholar
• Bohnsack, R., J. Pinkse, and A. Kolk. 2014. “Business Models for Sustainable Technologies: Exploring Business Model Evolution in the Case of Electric Vehicles.” Research Policy 43 (2): 284–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.10.014.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlos, W. C., and B. W. Lewis. 2018. “Strategic Silence: Withholding Certification Status As a Hypocrisy Avoidance Tactic.” Administrative Science Quarterly 63 (1): 130–169. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839217695089.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castellacci, F., and C. M. Lie. 2017. “A Taxonomy of Green Innovators: Empirical Evidence from South Korea.” Journal of Cleaner Production 143:1036–1047. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chandy, R. K., and G. J. Tellis. 2000. “The Incumbent’s Curse? Incumbency, Size, and Radical Product Innovation.” Journal of Marketing 64 (3): 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.64.3.1.18033.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen, C. 1997. The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chua, N., C. Miska, J. Mair, and G. Stahl. 2024. “Purpose in Management Research: Navigating a Complex and Fragmented Area of Study.” The Academy of Management Annals 18 (2): 1–33. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2022.0186.
   Google Scholar
• Danneels, E. 2002. “The Dynamics of Product Innovation and Firm Competences.” Strategic Management Journal 23 (12): 1095–1121. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.275.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dean, T. J., and J. S. McMullen. 2007. “Toward a Theory of Sustainable Entrepreneurship: Reducing Environmental Degradation Through Entrepreneurial Action.” Journal of Business Venturing 22 (1): 50–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2005.09.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doblinger, C., and B. Soppe. 2013. “Change-Actors in the U.S. Electric Energy System: The Role of Environmental Groups in Utility Adoption and Diffusion of Wind Power.” Energy Policy 61:274–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.07.028.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drori, I., and B. Honig. 2013. “A Process Model of Internal and External Legitimacy.” Organization Studies 34 (3): 345–376. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840612467153.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt, K. M., and M. E. Graebner. 2007. “Theory Building from Cases: Opportunities and Challenges.” Academy of Management Journal 50 (1): 25–32. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.24160888.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferns, G., and K. Amaeshi. 2021. “Fueling Climate (In)action: How Organizations Engage in Hegemonization to Avoid Transformational Action on Climate Change.” Organization Studies 42 (7): 1005–1029. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840619855744.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fink, L. 2018. “A Sense of Purpose.” BlackRock. https://www.blackrock.com/corporate/investor-relations/2018-larry-fink-ceo-letter.
   Google Scholar
• Friedman, M. 1970. “A Theoretical Framework for Monetary Analysis.” Journal of Political Economy 78 (2): 193–238. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/259623.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Georgallis, P., and B. H. Lee. 2020. “Toward a Theory of Entry in Moral Markets: The Role of Social Movements and Organizational Identity.” Strategic Organization 18 (1): 50–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127019827474.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• George, G., M. R. Haas, A. M. McGahan, S. J. D. Schillebeeckx, and P. Tracey. 2021. “Purpose in the For-Profit Firm: A Review and Framework for Management Research.” Journal of Management 49 (6): 01492063211006450. https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063211006450.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hahn, T., L. Preuss, J. Pinkse, and F. Figge. 2014. “Cognitive Frames in Corporate Sustainability: Managerial Sensemaking with Paradoxical and Business Case Frames.” Academy of Management Review 39 (4): 463–487. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2012.0341.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henderson, R. 2021. “Innovation in the 21st Century: Architectural Change, Purpose, and the Challenges of Our Time.” Management Science 67 (9): 5479–5488. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2020.3746.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henderson, R. M., and K. B. Clark. 1990. “Architectural Innovation: The Reconfiguration of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of Established Firms.” Administrative Science Quarterly 35 (1): 9–30. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393549.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henderson, R., and E. Van den Steen. 2015. “Why Do Firms Have “Purpose”? The Firm’s Role As a Carrier of Identity and Reputation.” The American Economic Review 105 (5): 326–330. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.p20151072.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hengst, I.-A., P. Jarzabkowski, M. Hoegl, and M. Muethel. 2020. “Toward a Process Theory of Making Sustainability Strategies Legitimate in Action.” Academy of Management Journal 63 (1): 246–271. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.0960.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hiatt, S. R., J. B. Grandy, and B. H. Lee. 2015. “Organizational Responses to Public and Private Politics: An Analysis of Climate Change Activists and U.S. Oil and Gas Firms.” Organization Science 26 (6): 1769–1786. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2015.1008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hockerts, K., and R. Wüstenhagen. 2010. “Greening Goliaths versus Emerging Davids — Theorizing About the Role of Incumbents and New Entrants in Sustainable Entrepreneurship.” Journal of Business Venturing 25 (5): 481–492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.07.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hollensbe, E., C. Wookey, L. Hickey, G. George, and C. Vincent Nichols. 2014. “Organizations with Purpose.” Academy of Management Journal 57 (5): 1227–1234. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2014.4005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IPCC. 2014. Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Geneva.
   Google Scholar
• Kaplan, S. 2023. “The Promises and Perils of Corporate Purpose.” Strategy Science 8 (2): 288–301. https://doi.org/10.1287/stsc.2023.0187.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kemp, R., and V. Oltra. 2011. “Research Insights and Challenges on Eco-Innovation Dynamics.” Industry & Innovation 18 (3): 249–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2011.562399.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kimsey, M., T. Geradts, and J. Battilana. 2023. “Walking the Purpose-Talk Inside a Large Company: Sustainable Product Development As an Instance of Divergent Change.” Strategy Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/stsc.2023.0197.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kohler, T. 2016. “Corporate Accelerators: Building Bridges Between Corporations and Startups.” Business Horizons 59 (3): 347–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2016.01.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kolk, A., and D. Levy. 2001. “Winds of Change: Corporate Strategy, Climate Change and Oil Multinationals.” European Management Journal 19 (5): 501–509. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-2373(01)00064-0.
   Google Scholar
• Langley, A. 1999. “Strategies for Theorizing from Process Data.” Academy of Management Review 24 (4): 691–710. https://doi.org/10.2307/259349.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mäkitie, T., M. Steen, T. M. Thune, L. Henrik Brynthe, A. Kenzhegaliyeva, E. F. Ullern, P. F. Kamsvåg, A. D. Andersen, and K. M. Hydle. 2020. Greener and Smarter? Transformations in Five Norwegian Industrial Sectors, SINTEF AS. https://hdl.handle.net/11250/2723268.
   Google Scholar
• Mayer, C. 2021. “The Future of the Corporation and the Economics of Purpose.” Journal of Management Studies 58 (3): 887–901. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12660.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer, R. E., S. Leixnering, and J. Veldman. 2022. “Rethinking the Corporation: Introduction.” In The Corporation: Rethinking the Iconic Form of Business Organization, edited by R. E. Meyer, S. Leixnering, and J. Veldman, In Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 1–12. Leeds: Emerald Publishing Limited.
   Google Scholar
• Morrison, A. D., and R. Mota. 2023. “A Theory of Organizational Purpose.” Academy of Management Review 48 (2): 203–219. https://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/amr.2019.0307.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norwegian-Petroleum. 2023. “The Government’s Revenues.” https://www.norskpetroleum.no/en/economy/governments-revenues/.
   Google Scholar
• Pahnke, E. C., R. Katila, and K. M. Eisenhardt. 2015. “Who Takes You to the Dance? How Partners’ Institutional Logics Influence Innovation in Young Firms.” Administrative Science Quarterly 60 (4): 596–633. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839215592913.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patala, S., I. Korpivaara, A. Jalkala, A. Kuitunen, and B. Soppe. 2019. “Legitimacy Under Institutional Change: How Incumbents Appropriate Clean Rhetoric for Dirty Technologies.” Organization Studies 40 (3): 395–419. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840617736938.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinkse, J., P. Demirel, and A. Marino. 2023. “Unlocking Innovation for Net Zero: Constraints, Enablers, and Firm-Level Transition Strategies.” Industry & Innovation 31 (1): 16–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2023.2269112.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pulver, S. 2007. “Making Sense of Corporate Environmentalism.” Organization & Environment 20 (1): 44–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026607300246.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schönwälder, J., and A. Weber. 2023. “Maturity Levels of Sustainable Corporate Entrepreneurship: The Role of Collaboration Between a firm’s Corporate Venture and Corporate Sustainability Departments.” Business Strategy and the Environment 32 (2): 976–990. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3085.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shepherd, D. A., and H. Patzelt. 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 35 (1): 137–163. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00426.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sine, W. D., and B. H. Lee. 2009. “Tilting at Windmills? The Environmental Movement and the Emergence of the U.S. Wind Energy Sector.” Administrative Science Quarterly 54 (1): 123–155. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.2009.54.1.123.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soderstrom, S. B., and K. L. Heinze. 2021. “From Paradoxical Thinking to Practicing Sustainable Business: The Role of a Business Collective Organization in Supporting Entrepreneurs.” Organization & Environment 34 (1): 74–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026619885108.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steen, M., and T. Weaver. 2017. “Incumbents’ Diversification and Cross-Sectorial Energy Industry Dynamics.” Research Policy 46 (6): 1071–1086. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.04.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stern, N., and A. Valero. 2021. “Innovation, Growth and the Transition to Net-Zero Emissions.” Research Policy 50 (9): 104293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2021.104293.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strauss, A., and J. Corbin. 1994. “Grounded Theory Methodology: An Overview.“ In Handbook of Qualitative Research, edited by N. K. Denzin, and Y. S. Lincoln, 273–285. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Stuart, T. E. 2000. “Interorganizational Alliances and the Performance of Firms: A Study of Growth and Innovation Rates in a High-Technology Industry.” Strategic Management Journal 21 (8): 791–811. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0266(200008)21:8<791:AID-SMJ121>3.0.CO;2-K.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stucki, T. 2019. “What Hampers Green Product Innovation: The Effect of Experience.” Industry & Innovation 26 (10): 1242–1270. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2019.1611417.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suchman, M. C. 1995. “Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches.” Academy of Management Review 20 (3): 571–610. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080331.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Triguero, A., L. Moreno-Mondéjar, and M. A. Davia. 2013. “Drivers of Different Types of Eco-Innovation in European SMEs.” Ecological Economics 92:25–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.04.009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tripsas, M., and G. Gavetti. 2000. “Cognition, Capabilities and Inertia: Evidence from Digital Imaging.” In SMS Blackwell Handbook of Organizational Capabilities, 393–412. Blackwell Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405164054.ch23
   Google Scholar
• Turnheim, B., and B. K. Sovacool. 2020. “Forever Stuck in Old Ways? Pluralising Incumbencies in Sustainability Transitions.” Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 35:180–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2019.10.012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Unruh, G. C. 2000. “Understanding Carbon Lock-In.” Energy Policy 28 (12): 817–830. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4215(00)00070-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vasi, I. B., and B. King. 2019. “Technology Stigma and Secondary Stakeholder Activism: The Adoption and Growth of Clean Power Programs in the U.S. Utility Sector.” Socio-Economic Review 17 (1): 37–61. https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwz021.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vasi, I. B., and B. G. King. 2012. “Social Movements, Risk Perceptions, and Economic Outcomes: The Effect of Primary and Secondary Stakeholder Activism on Firms’ Perceived Environmental Risk and Financial Performance.” American Sociological Review 77 (4): 573–596. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122412448796.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wesseling, J. H., S. Lechtenböhmer, M. Åhman, L. J. Nilsson, E. Worrell, and L. Coenen. 2017. “The Transition of Energy Intensive Processing Industries Towards Deep Decarbonization: Characteristics and Implications for Future Research.” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 79:1303–1313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.156.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Westphal, J. D. 2023. “Systemic Symbolic Management, Corporate Social Responsibility, and Corporate Purpose: A Cautionary Tale.” Strategy Science 8 (2): 221–232. https://doi.org/10.1287/stsc.2023.0188.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright, C., and D. Nyberg. 2017. “An Inconvenient Truth: How Organizations Translate Climate Change into Business As Usual.” Academy of Management Journal 60 (5): 1633–1661. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2015.0718.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wry, T., and J. G. York. 2017. “An Identity-Based Approach to Social Enterprise.” Academy of Management Review 42 (3): 437–460. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2013.0506.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar