Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
The crippled bottom line - measuring and managing sustainability
Uppsala Univ, Visby, Sweden.;Lulea Univ Technol, Lulea, Sweden..
Lulea Univ Technol, Dept Business Adm Technol & Social Sci, Lulea, Sweden..
Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Service Research Center.
2015 (English)In: International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, ISSN 1741-0401, E-ISSN 1758-6658, Vol. 64, no 3, 334-355 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Purpose - Sustainability can be assessed in the dimensions Profit, Planet and People. A problem with the approach is that these dimensions cannot be added. Another problem is that performance seldom is related to global system boundaries. The purpose of this paper is to study the "what" of sustainability by linking this to global boundaries and proposing "how" the authors could manage change toward sustainability. Design/methodology/approach - Sustainability definitions are reviewed to identify main stakeholders. People value defined as utility is compared to Planet harm as carbon emissions and People harm as prices of products. This approach is examined in business studying the global processes of housing, transporting, providing food and cement manufacturing. Findings - The relative indicators with focus on People utility compare to Planet and People harm seem to be relevant for measuring the level of sustainability. The Crippled Bottom Line of People value/Planet harm and People value/Planet harm is proposed as the "what" to measure and the change process of "understanding-defining-measuring-communicating-leading change" is proposed as the "how" to change. Research limitations/implications - The research is based on identifying the main stakeholders based on sustainability definitions and from that point mostly on deductive reasoning. Practical implications - The practical implications are that organizations could define sustainability indicators with objectives that are linked to global limits. Social implications - Advocating the use of price as a social indicator could have social implications. Originality/value - The paper contributes to the discussion of how to link global limits to organizational measurements and targets.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2015. Vol. 64, no 3, 334-355 p.
Keyword [en]
Creating shared value, Triple bottom line, Profit People Planet, Sustainability KPI, Sustainability reporting, Value per harm
National Category
Business Administration
Research subject
Business Administration
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kau:diva-63524DOI: 10.1108/IJPPM-09-2014-0139ISI: 000213251800002OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kau-63524DiVA: diva2:1140213
Available from: 2017-09-11 Created: 2017-09-11 Last updated: 2017-09-11

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Johnson, Mikael
By organisation
Service Research Center
In the same journal
International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management
Business Administration

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf