Responsible investment and the claim of corporate change: a sensemaking perspective on how institutional investors may drive corporate social responsibility
In: Gabler Research
In: EBS-Forschung Bd. 79
6962256 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Gabler Research
In: EBS-Forschung Bd. 79
SSRN
Working paper
In: Peace and conflict: journal of peace psychology ; the journal of the Society for the Study of Peace, Conflict, and Violence, Peace Psychology Division of the American Psychological Association, Band 28, Heft 2, S. 214-225
ISSN: 1532-7949
This book offers comprehensive business-oriented insights on trends and challenges arising from the transition to a service-lead economy. The authors examine current and future Web service business models and propose a framework for Web service Value Networks.
In: NISER occasional paper 2005,6
In: The annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Band 59, S. 212-225
ISSN: 0002-7162
This article develops an integrative perspective on corporate responsibility by synthesising competing perspectives on the responsibility of the corporation at the organisational and societal levels of analysis. We review three major corporate responsibility perspectives, which we refer to as economic, critical, and politico-ethical. We analyse the major potential uses and pitfalls of the perspectives, and integrate the debate on these two levels. Our synthesis concludes that when a society has a robust division of moral labour in place, the responsibility of a corporation may be economic (as suggested under the economic perspective) without jeopardising democracy and sustainability (as reported under the critical perspective). Moreover, the economic role of corporations neither signifies the absence of deliberative democratic mechanisms nor business practices extending beyond compliance (as called for under the politico-ethical perspective). The study underscores the value of integrating different perspectives and multiple levels of analysis to present comprehensive descriptions and prescriptions of the responsibility phenomenon. ; Peer reviewed
BASE
This Deliverable specifies the main existing stakeholders involved in legal publication for the BOLD2020 vision, and their working practices with regards to the consumption, creation, use and exploitation of legal data. Workstream 1 involves the identification of the problem through a Soft Systems Methodology approach (Annex 1), the mapping of stakeholders and the identification of their understanding of the problem domain, the activities they are engaged in, and the key use cases for the reuse and consumption of legal data. It also maps the flows of data as a result of the legal, social and market limitations and identifies potential flows of value in the same context. Together with country case studies Deliverables 1.2.d15 (four reports based on protocol D1.2.d1), this report will feed into Workstream 2 activities 2.32.4, and the "White paper on the OpenLaws.eu open innovation community" (finalized in M24) to provide an updated set of recommendations based on the overall findings of the OpenLaws.eu project. The report analyses using the standard subtitles for the BOLD2020 vision: big data, open data and legal data. In Big Data, it explains the term, its impacting by digitalisation, mashups, machinereadability, interoperability. Open Data is explored for the use of standards, licences, and the impact of reuse of Public Sector Information (PSI) as well as generating of open data by users. Free Data within open data is explored via the Free/Open Source Software movement, the reuse and enhancement of law as a public goods via the history of the Free Access to Law Movement (FALM). Legal Data is analysed within sectors of users including law firms, universities, citizens. The typology of judgements, legislation, regulations, soft law, legal literature is used. We examine consumption patterns, stakeholders, users, and 'prosumers'. Prosumerism and the law is finally explored, which introduces the concept of the lawyer creating their own sources of law via both authorship and stewardship of online resources.
BASE
From humanitarian intervention to the responsibility to protect (1945 -2011) -- Just war, responsibility to protect and punishment -- The irresponsibility of the responsibility to protect -- The responsibility to protect as a foreclosing structure of address.
Shipping list no.: 86-272-P. ; Cover title. ; Mode of access: Internet.
BASE
In: (2020) 35 Australian Journal of Corporate Law 235-262
SSRN
In: Problems of management in the 21st century, Band 13, Heft 1, S. 4-6
ISSN: 2538-712X
We live in VUCA world. One of crucial modern management challenges is to operate in volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity business environment (VUCA) (Gorzeń-Mitka 2017, 2018). Nowadays each organization must continuously seek for the ways to improve its operations (Sipa, Gorzen-Mitka & Skibinski, 2015, Sitek, 2017, Wasiluk, 2017). At the moment, many researchers and business practitioners more and more often indicate that the current way to run organizations has been stretched to its limits. At the same time, many studies indicate the relationship between a higher level of organizational consciousness and performance (Ajmal& Aziz Lodhi, 2015, Pandey & Gupta, 2008, Rooke & Torbert, 1998, Pruzan, 2001).