Integrating Sustainability Into an Organization’s Culture: A Grounded Model
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While companies are facing increasing expectations to take action on sustainability issues, we have a limited understanding of how organizations can integrate sustainability into their culture and everyday behaviour. In our study, we investigate how a large manufacturing company attempts to integrate sustainability into its culture by undertaking an inductive study in six of the departments at its headquarters. We find that the process of culture change unfolds differently among these departments and identify several interrelated mechanisms that help explain why some departments were able to expand their sustainability strategies of action and their meanings and concepts towards sustainability while others were not. Based on our analysis, we develop a grounded model of the role of internal change agents (involving cultural seeding and ongoing support behaviours) and the amplifying role of direct leaders in the expansion of an organization’s cultural repertoire and the integration of new strategies of action. Our findings contribute to extant work on organization and sustainability, culture change, and issue selling.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it