The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Matter of Time: The Temporal Perspectives of Organizational Responses to Climate Change
Abstract
Prior research often categorizes corporate environmental responses on a spectrum that ranges from reactive to proactive. Such research subordinates the role of time, yet time is central to organizational responses to environmental issues such as climate change. In this paper, we study five oil and gas firms and inductively develop a framework of corporate responses to climate change that explicitly acknowledges the role of time. The framework identifies two categories of corporate responses grounded in different temporal perspectives: focused and integrated. We discuss the implications of this categorization for research on corporate environmentalism and time in organizational theory.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“While short-termism is the dominant and preferred perspective in most business contexts (Slawinski & Bansal, 2018)”
From Timely hypocrisy? Hypocrisy temporalities in CSR communication (2020) · cites this paper as Slawinski & Bansal, 2018
In the citing paper
“The dominant business narrative on economic growth is characterized by a linear conception of time, according to which the future is “an indefinite extension of present commitments” (Skrimshire, 2018: 5; see also Slawinski & Bansal, 2012).”
From Timely hypocrisy? Hypocrisy temporalities in CSR communication (2020) · cites this paper as Slawinski & Bansal, 2012
In the citing paper
“the expectation that long-term perspectives may encourage hypocrisy produce much skepticism towards such perspectives (Slawinski & Bansal, 2018).”
From Timely hypocrisy? Hypocrisy temporalities in CSR communication (2020) · cites this paper as Slawinski & Bansal, 2018
In the citing paper
“the need to implement long-term systemic perspectives is accentuated in most literatures on CSR and sustainability (e.g., Gilbert & Rasche, 2007;Gladwin, Kennelly, & Krause, 1995;Slawinski & Bansal, 2018; see also Winkler, Etter, & Castelló, 2019).”
From Timely hypocrisy? Hypocrisy temporalities in CSR communication (2020) · cites this paper as Slawinski & Bansal, 2018
Citations
Cites
Building Theories from Case Study Research
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258557 · Cited by 17,455
A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance
Carroll, A. B. (1979) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/257850 · Cited by 10,480
Corporate Social and Financial Performance: A Meta-Analysis
Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840603024003910 · Cited by 7,641
Political conservatism as motivated social cognition.
Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.339 · Cited by 4,904 · cited 1×
“In other words, they demonstrated cognitive complexity, defined as ‘the extent of differentiation among multiple perspectives or dimensions and the higher order integration or synthesis of these differentiated components’ (Jost et al., 2003, p. 353).”
BackgroundA contingent resource-based view of proactive corporate environmental strategy
Aragón-Correa, J. A., & Sharma, S. (2003) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2003.8925233 · Cited by 2,362 · cited 2×
“Proactive firms make major investments in product and technology innovations that have long payback periods, such as new power plants, and encourage behavioral changes that take time to embed, such as employee participation (e.g., Aragon-Correa, 1998; Aragon-Correa & Sharma, 2003; Hart, 1995).”
BackgroundA Selective Review of Time Assumptions in Strategy Research
Mosakowski, E., & Earley, P. C. (2000) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/259207 · Cited by 279
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 49
- 10.2307/3560246 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.2307/3560239 · DOI
- 10.2307/256942 · DOI
- 10.5465/amr.2008.27745504 · DOI
- 10.1515/9781503619319 · DOI
- 10.1177/014920638801400209 · DOI
- 10.1002/smj.409 · DOI
- 10.1177/017084069501600601 · DOI
- 10.1002/smj.299 · DOI
- Clark P. (1985). A review of the theories of time and structure for organizational sociology. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 4, 35–80.
- 10.5465/amr.2005.15281441 · DOI
- Doob L. W. (1971). Patterning of time. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
- Dubinskas F. (1988). Janus organizations: Scientists and managers in genetic engineering firms. In Dubinskas F. (Ed.), Making time: Ethnographies of high-technology organizations (pp. 170–232). Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
- Elkington J. (1998). Cannibals with forks: the triple bottom line of 21st century business. Stony Creek, CT: New Society.
- George J. M., Jones G. R. (2000). The role of time in theory and theory building. Journal of Management Studies, 26, 657–684.
- 10.2307/258963 · DOI
- 10.5465/AME.2003.10025194 · DOI
- 10.2307/256876 · DOI
- 10.2307/41166305 · DOI
- 10.1017/CBO9780511546013 · DOI
- Jaques E. (1982). The form of time. New York: Crane & Russak.
- Keith D. (2009). Dangerous abundance. In Homer-Dixon T., Garrison N. (Eds.), Carbon shift: how the twin crises of oil depletion and climate change will define the future (pp. 27–57). Toronto: Random House Canada.
- 10.1016/j.emj.2004.04.011 · DOI
- 10.2307/41166304 · DOI
- 10.5465/amr.1996.9702100316 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1006/jvbe.1999.1707 · DOI
- 10.9774/GLEAF.978-1-909493-48-3_15 · DOI
- Macnaughten P., Urry J. (1998). Contested natures. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
- 10.5465/amj.2005.15993111 · DOI
- March J. G. (2008). Understanding organizational adaptation. In March J. G. (Ed.), Explorations in organizations (pp. 106–115). Stanford, CA: Stanford Business Books. · DOI
- 10.1057/9780230622654 · DOI
- McGrath J. E., Rotchford N. L. (1983). Time and behavior in organizations. In Cummings L. L., Staw B. M. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (pp. 57–101). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
- Miles M. B., Huberman M. A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: a sourcebook of new methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
- 10.2307/3560240 · DOI
- Nuttin J. R. (1985). Future time perspective and motivation: theory and research method. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
- 10.1525/cmr.2010.52.4.100 · DOI
- 10.1287/orsc.13.6.684.501 · DOI
- 10.4324/9780203887103 · DOI
- Schein E. H. (1992). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
- 10.1037/0021-9010.72.4.642 · DOI
- 10.2307/1556361 · DOI
- 10.1177/0021886399351008 · DOI
- Sorokin P. A. (1943). Sociocultural causality, space, time: a study of referential principles of sociology and social science. New York: Russell & Russell.
- Strauss A., Corbin J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
- 10.5465/AME.1992.4274427 · DOI
- 10.1002/bse.618 · DOI
- Yin R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
- Zerubavel E. (1981). Hidden rhythms: schedules and calendars in social life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Zimbardo P., Boyd J. (2008). The time paradox: the new psychology of time that will change your life. New York: Free Press.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The long‐term benefits of organizational resilience through sustainable business practices
Ortiz‐de‐Mandojana, N., & Bansal, P. (2016) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.2410 · Cited by 1,260
Self-citationTimely hypocrisy? Hypocrisy temporalities in CSR communication
Christensen, L. T., Morsing, M., & Thyssen, O. (2020) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.020 · Cited by 105
Metadata
- Authors
- Slawinski, N., & Bansal, P.
- Affiliations
- Memorial University of Newfoundland (CA)
- Western University (CA)
- Venue
- Organization Studies
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2012-11
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1537-1563
- ISSN
- 0170-8406 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-3044
- OpenAlex
- W2048932651
- Cited by
- 304
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 17 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 31.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Organization Studies (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Environmental Sustainability in Business
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting
- Keywords
- climate change, corporate environmental response, time perspective, oil and gas companies, corporate environmentalism
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
