Bouncing Back

Building Resilience Through Social and Environmental Practices in the Context of the 2008 Global Financial Crisis

Mark Desjardine, Pratima Bansal, Yang Yang

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

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 languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1434-1460
Number of pages27
JournalJournal of Management
Volume45
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2019

Fingerprint

Resilience
Environmental practices
Social practice
Global financial crisis
Organizational outcomes
Severity
Business practices
Remedies

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Finance
  • Strategy and Management

Cite this

@article{b7a22f0633e54c2d9ff71a1185e8ab9a,
title = "Bouncing Back: Building Resilience Through Social and Environmental Practices in the Context of the 2008 Global Financial Crisis",
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.",
author = "Mark Desjardine and Pratima Bansal and Yang Yang",
year = "2019",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/0149206317708854",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "45",
pages = "1434--1460",
journal = "Journal of Management",
issn = "0149-2063",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "4",

}

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 journalArticle

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

VL - 45

SP - 1434

EP - 1460

JO - Journal of Management

JF - Journal of Management

SN - 0149-2063

IS - 4

ER -