Shawn Pope

@article{worren_1805,

title = {Connected but conflicted: Separating incompatible roles in organizations},

author = {Nicolay Worren and Shawn Pope},

url = {https://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/amr.2021.0054},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-03-01},

journal = {Academy Of Management Review},

volume = {Online First},

number = {Online Fir},

pages = {Online First},

abstract = {A fundamental organization design principle is to group interdependent roles into the same sub-units to minimize coordination costs. However, observations in organizations, as well as theorizing in other sub-fields, such as corporate governance, indicate that interdependent roles sometimes perform conflicting functions, suggesting that they should be separated rather than integrated. Building on work in systems theory and axiomatic design theory, we discuss how to reconcile these two perspectives. Our key proposal is to distinguish between ends and means, or functions (e.g., goals or mandates) and structures (e.g., roles). This conceptualization makes it possible for two roles to be simultaneously interdependent in work processes yet conflicted in goals. Our framework leads to a modification of the traditional organization design principle of grouping based on interdependencies. It also suggests an alternative explanation for the division of labor within organizations: Organizations divide labor not only to capture gains from specialization, but also to avoid functional conflict.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {online},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{lim_1595,

title = {What drives companies to do good? A ?universal? ordering of corporate social responsibility motivations},

author = {Alwyn Lim and Shawn Pope},

url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/csr.2199},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-01-01},

journal = {Corporate Social Responsibility And Environmental Management},

volume = {29},

number = {1},

pages = {233-255},

abstract = {The classic question of why companies do corporate social responsibility (CSR) is central to much theoretical, regression-based, and experimental research. Guiding research into this question is a tripartite schema of normative, instrumental, and political CSR motivations that has become increasingly established in the CSR literature. This paper challenges the schema's status as a typology of equally plausible alternatives through an integration and analysis of a worldwide literature of 120 existing academic surveys on CSR motivation. Rather, the paper reformulates the schema into a surveyed ordering of CSR motivations that might be called ?universal? in having remarkable stability across time periods, industries, company sizes, geographic regions, question formats, types of survey respondents, and types of survey producers. The paper challenges the schema also by documenting robust internal heterogeneity that it conceals, particularly where instrumental motivations are concerned, which are among the most and least self-selected CSR motivations in our results.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{pope_1493,

title = {Where, When, Who: Corporate Social Responsibility and Brand Value, A Global Panel Study},

author = {Shawn Pope and Jimi Kim},

url = {https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/00076503211019315},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-06-01},

journal = {Business & Society},

abstract = {x},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {online},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{lim_1189,

title = {Three types of organizational boundary spanning: Predicting CSR policy extensiveness among global consumer products companies},

author = {Alwyn Lim and Shawn Pope},

url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/beer.12266},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-07-01},

journal = {Business Ethics-A European Review},

volume = {29},

number = {3},

pages = {451-470},

abstract = {As part of the rise of a worldwide corporate social responsibility (CSR) movement, companies have increasingly incorporated social and environmental concerns into their policies. This paper examines the extensiveness of these policies, proposing that an underappreciated contributor is the degree of organizational boundary spanning. The paper is novel in integrating multiple types of boundary spanning into a single empirical framework, including product, sub?unit, and national boundary spanning. The paper adds complexity to the literature by theorizing that different types of boundary spanning associate with CSR policy extensiveness in different issue areas. The results show that product spanning associates with CSR policy extensiveness in the area of consumers, sub?unit spanning in the areas of workers, and nation?state spanning in all issue areas. A unique, comprehensive, and global data set of 2,714 prominent consumer goods companies in the GoodGuide database underpins these findings.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{pope_1043,

title = {The Governance Divide in Global Corporate Responsibility: The Global Structuration of Reporting and Certification Frameworks, 1998-2017},

author = {Shawn Pope and Alwyn Lim},

url = {https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0170840619830131},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-06-01},

journal = {Organization Studies},

volume = {41},

number = {6},

pages = {821-854},

abstract = {In recent decades, as worldwide attention to corporate responsibility increased, the global corporate responsibility (GCR) movement did not converge on a singular governance model nor hybridize into myriad country-specific models. The movement, rather, bifurcated into onerous certification frameworks and more lax reporting frameworks. We examine this ?governance divide' in the GCR movement by investigating the cross-national diffusion of seven core GCR frameworks. We adopt a glocalization perspective that conceptualizes a vertical nesting of local and global contexts. Our cross-national quantitative analyses suggest that, while linkages to global culture have encouraged business participation in all GCR frameworks, power dependencies related to international trade and domestic factors related to effectiveness of local governance institutions have contributed to divergent diffusion patterns across reporting and certification frameworks. We discuss these findings in relation to several organizational perspectives and note their implications for further research on corporate responsibility.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{pope_1044,

title = {The Pyramid of Nonprofit Responsibility: The Institutionalization of Organizational Responsibility Across Sectors},

author = {Shawn Pope and Patricia Bromley and Alwyn Lim and John W. Meyer},

url = {https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11266-018-0038-3},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-12-01},

journal = {Voluntas},

volume = {29},

number = {6},

pages = {1300-1314},

abstract = {Observers have noted that organizations in all sectors, whether business, nonprofit, or government, have been moving toward rationalized structures that presuppose and express empowered organizational actorhood. We draw upon neo-institutional theory in this paper to extend the argument: The arrival of organizational actorhood has precipitated a concomitant, cross-sectoral movement toward organizational social responsibility. Whereas existing research has tended to theorize the social responsibilities of businesses, we develop a pyramid conceptual schema to array the social responsibilities of nonprofits. We then document the coevolution of organizational actorhood and responsibility across both sectors with a metastudy of nearly 200 extant surveys. We chart the institutionalization of a slate of formal structures that express organizational actorhood (i.e., mission statements, vision statements, and strategic plans) and that profess and define organizational social responsibilities (i.e., core values, ethics codes, and responsibility communications). We close with implications and future directions for organizational studies and research on corporate social responsibility},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{pope_1045,

title = {International Organizations as Mobilizing Structures: World CSR Associations and Their Disparate Impacts on Members' CSR Practices, 2000-2016},

author = {Shawn Pope and Alwyn Lim},

url = {https://academic.oup.com/sf/article-abstract/95/4/1725/3100305?redirectedFrom=fulltext},

year  = {2017},

date = {2017-06-01},

journal = {Social Forces},

volume = {95},

number = {4},

pages = {1725-1756},

abstract = {International organizations are key players in globalization, but not all international organizations influence global processes in the same ways. In this paper, we argue that differences in international organizations' mobilizing structures can shape the extent to which these organizations can positively impact the practices of their members. We present the first comparative and quantitative assessment of world corporate social responsibility (CSR) associations that comprise business participants that act collectively to address pressing social and environmental concerns. We conduct time-series panel regression analyses of a unique dataset of business participation in three core world CSR associations and test their effects on business adoption of three major CSR frameworks and business performance across six major CSR evaluation schemes. Our findings reveal that world CSR associations with participatory structures, compared to those with honorific or convocational structures, more consistently encourage member businesses to adopt CSR policies and to achieve highly evaluated CSR practices. We discuss these results in relation to sociological and world society perspectives on international organizations as well as implications for future research on global corporate responsibility},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{pope_1047,

title = {Local Variation in World Society: Six Characteristics of Global Diffusion},

author = {Shawn Pope and John W. Meyer},

url = {https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/23254823.2016.1211484?journalCode=recp20},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-07-01},

journal = {European Journal of Cultural and Political Sociology},

volume = {3},

number = {02-mars},

pages = {280-305},

abstract = {We review world society research that theorises differences rather than similarities in diffusion into local settings. Six characteristics of global diffusion processes, most of which contribute directly to local variation, are featured: structural embeddedness, decoupling, domestication, multiple diffusion, contingent diffusion, and multi-level diffusion. We illustrate each characteristic with examples from, and applications to, the global movement for corporate social responsibility.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{pope_1048,

title = {The Global Corporate Organization},

author = {Shawn Pope and John W. Meyer},

url = {https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/management-and-organization-review/article/global-corporate-organization/2AC88D7606B1D1E709DE2ECA76F597B2},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-07-14},

journal = {Management And Organization Review},

volume = {11},

number = {2},

pages = {173-177},

abstract = {I feel very fortunate to be able to open the MOR Dialogue, Debate, and Discussion editorial section with a striking perspective advanced by Shawn Pope and John W. Meyer of Stanford University. They point to the rise of a global corporate organization that is shedding its national distinctiveness and any remaining local rooting. Instead, they envision global standardization as no longer related to national origins and as managed according to abstract, universalistic principles. The global standard is furthermore run by managers who graduated from the same homogenous business programs, who gain advice from like-minded consultants, and who, of course, go to the same Davos meetings. The new standard, the universal corporation, seeks to convey its socially responsible character by confirming, sometimes voluntarily, to the standards of excellence as decreed by other organizations perhaps increasingly like itself. This provocative perspective invites debate - refutations and support alike - in future MOR issues and blogs. Where does your research lead you to take a stand?},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}