Lecture Notes Condensed MGMT2001 PDF

LECTURE 1 Course objective: corporations take accountability for impact of increasing formal and informal expectations relating to their impact on the natural environment. Implementing sustainability has become increasingly important strategic intent of operations. Evaluates the scope and reasons b...

LECTURE 1 Course objective: corporations take accountability for impact of increasing formal and informal expectations relating to their impact on the natural environment. Implementing sustainability has become increasingly important strategic intent of operations. Evaluates the scope and reasons behind these expectations and evaluates the impact on corporations operating in a dynamic competitive environment in a capitalist economy. - How can we can encourages organisations and leaders to engage in sustainability actions. - Understand psychological underpinnings and empirical findings to answer the normative and positive questions. Corporate Social Responsibility: Triple Bottom Line: 1. Profit 2. People 3. Planet Organisations have ethical considerations such as 1. Environmental; enviro friendly 2. Ethical; operating fairly 3. Philanthropic; Improve society 4. Economic; rooted in financial decisions and commitment to do good Why aren't we doing what is necessary? "Dragons of Inaction"; Robert Gifford - psychological barriers to behaviour change Key factors of behavioural inaction: COGNITION; ancient brain; our brain has evolved to deal with immediate needs and survival, Climate change is a long term problem Uncertainty; functions as a justification for pursuing inaction and self-interest - Example of the "uncertainty" from the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report - "Observed increases in areas burned by wildfires have been attributed to human-induced climate change in some regions (medium to high confidence). Adverse impacts from tropical cyclones, with related losses and damages19, have increased due to sea level rise and the increase in heavy precipitation (medium confidence)" ✓ This is well-intended, accurate descriptions, but leads to an underestimation of the risk.  Optimism Bias; good for our mental health but makes us subconsciously discount risks, "better than average effect", the tendency for people to perceive themselves as more skilled or superior to their average peer. Self Efficacy: people don’t act as they believe they have little behavioural control or impact over the consequences. IDEOLOGIES Superhuman powers: belief that a religious deity or Mother Nature will not forsake them - some religious people believe that the rising sea levels do not affect them. Techno salvation: overconfidence in the efficacy of technology as a barrier SOCIAL COMPARISON Social Norms; comparison of actions with others, changing actions accordingly, if others don’t act, why should I? Perceived Risks: changing behaviour involves risks, including functional, physical, financial, social, psychological and temporal e.g. changing to electric vehicles; will it save money? Will it be safe? If it doesn't, It’s a waste of time. Limited Behaviour; change happens with behaviours that are relatively easy to change, e.g. switch to plastic free over vegetarianism. - Issues with Tokenism - Rebound effect: gains made are diminished or erased by subsequent actions "impact is 0 when you do something good and something bad". This is a moral licensing effect, demonstrating your goodness in doing something enviro-friendly, giving you justification to engage in destructive behaviour.  Discredence: trust in experts, scientists and government officials is damage, change is difficult. - People think Climate change is a problem invented by scientists who are pursuing a phantom issue. Sunk Costs; cost that has already been incurred; and cannot be recovered; it makes change difficult to happen - We have invested a lot in our current economic system, we are hesitant to change the behaviours in our system. THEORY OF PLANNED BEHAVIOUR Behaviour results from the intention to engage in specific behaviour - Intention depends on the 3 factors 1. Attitudes; extent to which engaging in a behaviour is evaluated positively or negatively 2. Subjective Norms; Extent to which person believes that important others approve/ disapprove of behaviour. 3. Perceived control; perceived ability to perform behaviour. Purchasing Green Products; Explained. Attitudes: 1 (bad)-7 (good) the friendliness of products Subjective Norms: 1(disagree)-7(agree) people important to me think I should buy green products Behavioural Control: I have complete control over whether or not I purchase these products (1(disagree)-7(agree)) do I have capacity to buy them. Behavioural Intentions: I would consider switching for ecological reasons; (1(unlikely)-7(likely)) Green purchasing behaviour; After 1 month, recontact participants, frequency of shopping for green products, (1(never)-7(every time)) LECTURE 2: Holistic thinking: - Focus on the context as a whole - "world consists of interconnected parts" - Objects and behaviours are understood in terms of their relationships with the context - More prevalent in non western cultures Analytic thinking: - Focus on objects and attributes - "world consists of independent objects" - Objects and behaviours are understood in terms of their attributes - More prevalent in western cultures Memory Recognition test of Fish: - Shown in same background - Different background - Holistic thinkers suffered to remember the fish in new background, Analytics were good at remembering across different backgrounds but holistic were best initially. Categorization task Holistic Thinking/ Pro-Environment Supporters - Greater awareness of context and environmental risks - Greater connectedness with environment and relations. - Greater positivity with environmental behaviour Can we improve holisitic thinking? - Thinking styles have set in patterns; hard to change Values: - Desirable trans situational goals that vary in importance and serve as guiding principles (Schwartz 1992) - Beliefs about the desirability of certain end states e.g power: states in which you have authority wealth etc - Abstract constructs that transcend specific situations - Guiding principles for the evaluation of people events and behaviour E.g. security, values predict behaviours > couldn't live in US with gun issues. - Ordered in priority; choices are based on value which is more important. SCHWARTZ VALUE THEORY: 10 culturally universal value types: Power, achievement, hedonism, stimulation, self-direction, universalism, benevolence, tradition, conformity, security. - Closer = more Compatible values 4 higher order values: openness, self transcendence, conservation, self enhancement. - Hedonism can be included either in openness and self enhancement. - Self transcendence values more likely to show pro environmental behaviour - Self enhancement less likely because more individual focused less context focused. Survey data from five countries and values for pro-environmental action - Self transcendence values negatively correlated with egoistic and positively correlated with biosphere concerns. - Self enhancement vice versa. How values correlate with environmental concerns ^^^^ Activate values: - can try make values of self transcendence more salient, the assumption is generally that people hold and endorse the value of self-transcendence to an extent. - Tailor the messages and appeals according to different values; financial appeal, Beliefs and Religion; consists of loosely connected set of beliefs and practices. Religiosity has some implications for our environmental problems. Different aspects of religiosity may lead to contradictory behaviours and tendencies. - Different representations: benevolent/ authoritarian/ mystical force. Why? Valuation of nature: uniting with nature as god is within nature. Why? Benevolent God is forgiving, no incentive. Authoritarian God is in control, it is fateful and Is his intention/ harms sense of perceived control. LECTURE 3: Average of importance on different values among university students  Can be further categorised into 4 values (overarching) APPEALS to CS: conformity APPEALS to CS/ST/OC: universalism and security, openness to change. Fear appeal; appeals to the value security; varied efficacy of these appeals as fear is sometimes not generally generating an openness rather a rejection (depending on context). What emotions may be relevant to environmental attitudes and behaviours? - Outrage - Fear - Discourage - Hopelessless  - Ignorance - Sadness - Hopeful - Optimism - Anger - Excitement - Pessimism - Awe AWE: arises when people encounter something vast; extraordinary displays of beauty, complexity and power (SELF TRANSCENDENT: attention moves from self to others; pro environmental behaviours) - Involves positively valenced feelings, such as wonder, amazement, appreciation and admiration - Natural world, beautiful art, extraordinary accomplishment, religious experiences. - Trait awe; i feel wonder almost every day (1-5 agree) - Positive correlation r=.41, people who more likely to experience awe in daily lives are more frequent to engage in pro-environmental action. Experimental Evidence: randomly assigned ppl into different conditions Awe condition: think about a scene which made you feel awe Happiness condition: think about a time where you felt happy Neutral condition: think about something you did recently; things in your day. Outcome: environmental sacrifice; are you willing to make sacrifice to your standard of living for the environment (1-7) Social dominance orientation (SDO); preferences for group based hierarchy and inequality  - Those with high SDO desire to maintain status within differences between groups and individuals - Anti-environmental behaviours; inclination towards hierarchy translates to preserving heirarchy of humans as top of the food chain, places lower value on eco-systems. (human v natural world, EGO > ECO). - Awe decreases SDO, leading to greater pro-environmental attitudes and engagement - Not just natural awe but also social awe, pro-social awe such as birthgiving etc. EMOTIONS AS MOTIVE FOR ACTION: Brief psychological and physiological response to something - Relatively speaking they are short-term compared to mood Play powerful roles in guiding action; e.g. gratitude motivates people to engage in reciprocal behaviour or show appreciation Emotions that pro-environmental behaviour elicits are important predictors Anticipated emotions: how would i feel if i recycled/ saved energy/ use pro environmental products? Experienced emotions: emotions people actually experience when doing pro-environmental acts Hedonic view: making pro-environmental behaviours pleasant as a motive for action - Easy? Probably not; a lot of monotony and effort involved in pro-environmental behaviour. Eudemonic view: people can engage in pro-eco behaviours to do morally right, meaningful things even if they are painful to do - Feeling of guilt (inconsistency with morals) and pride (consistency with morals)  - Negative experience impacts ability to commit harmful action - Pride works in the opposite way Antecedents of Anticipated Emotions: Attitudes: extent to which engaging in a behaviour is evaluated positively or negatively, using eco products (1-5) Descriptive social norms: the extent to which a behaviour is prevalent with the people around you - Anticipated guilt and anticipated pride heavily affects descriptive social norms. - Perceived frequency of surrounding people using eco-products from 1-5 affects the prominence of anticipated guilt and pride. Individualistic Countries show that norms less so affect anticipated emotions. Personal attitudes are paramount to behaviour and decision making, it has more determinacy on eco-friendly behaviour than in collectivist cultures. - Wealth bias and categorisation; there is a lot of variation between these countries within the categories of individual v collective Gratitude and Environmental Behaviour - Positive feeling when one received something good and undeserved - Motivates reciprocity (or appreciation) - Associated with prosocial behaviour not only towards one's benefactor but also toward third parties (indirect reciprocity) How can we utilise this emotion to initiate or motivate? - Sacrifices made in order to afford luxuries (maybe by parents or past generations) LECTURE 4: Control and Sacrifice Conditions: Control conditions are how your actions are different from past generations, agent is asked to compare their behaviour in difference or similarity to their grandparents Sacrifice conditions are how your actions are afforded by sacrifices made by past generations; in what way have these sacrifices allowed you to live your life. Gratitude and Pro environmental behaviour; if you think sacrifices have been made by past generations, you are more likely to be grateful to your current lifestyles and perpetuate good behaviour for future generations. - Assumption: Pro environmental behaviour is sacrifice for future generations. Those who engage in it for egoistic reasons, this process of future sacrifice will not hold. - People may express gratitude, but then not want to financially sacrifice themselves (as past generations have). General gratitude: can produce similar effects of sacrifice (Watkins and Goodwin) - Produces general sense of obligation toward future generations/ sense of concern - Those who feel this more frequently show greater responsibility toward proenvironmental actions as well as toward future generations. Social norms: Humans are social animals: they partake in collectives and it is not easy to survive on ones own. Fundamental needs to belong: need to be accepted and included means conforming to social norms Descriptive social norms; what others do/ what is common/ status quo; provides information about what is adaptive and effective Injunctive social norms: what others believe is moral/ immoral, punishment and standards due to potential social sanctions Normative Messaging: - Presenting information about social norms in a way that people increase behaviours that are pro-environmental - Utilise the rule of conformity to guilt people into changing their behaviour. - Personal perceptions of social norms will be more intense and powerful on your behaviour, as when you think everyone does something when in reality it is like 50%, you are more likely to pursue that course of action. 2 types: 1. Personalized Normative feedback: social comparison, telling people information about themselves as well as their peers. - Labour intensive in collecting information, but powerful - Collect and calculate average info, present info together to compare. - E.g. use of national average/ neighbourhood lines of energy consumption and then your use etc. - Boomerang effect is a negative side effect; those who are doing the right thing may reduce their positive behaviours as they conform to social norms, feel justified in worsening their behaviour as others are. Solution: make people believe their good behaviour is valued. Opower energy report: uses you as a personalised feedback normative to compare electricity usage alongside neighbours and efficient neighbours. 2. Social Norms Marketing: present information about social norms, typically a high incidence of good behaviours by others, fix wrong perceptions of held social norms. - Easy way to disseminate to large population - When people underestimate prevalence of a good behaviour Towel study: Standard condition: help save the environment etc Norms condition: join our fellow guests in helping save the environment almost 75% of guests do help etc. Participation went up significantly with the different norm condition; - Challenge; is it problematic or unethical to provide false information about social norms, what if no one reuses towels? LECTURE 5: Beliefs about energy saving ▪ Benefiting society: “How much do you think conserving energy will benefit society?” (1 = not at all to 4 = extremely) ▪ Protecting the environment: “How much do you think conserving energy will protect the natural environment?” ▪ Saving money: “How much money do you think you can save by conserving energy in your home? ▪ Norms: “How often do you think your neighbours try to conserve energy?” In reality, this is how much every factor predicts energy saving behaviour: This is how important we ranked each factor as conducive to saving energy: Save money > Protect environment > benefit society > a lot of other people try to conserve This is reality of how important every factor is in inducing saving energy Benefits society > other people conserve > protect environment > save money Poor self assessment: we do not have a good sense of why we do certain behaviours, you think you save energy to save money, however, your conserving energy is likely more informed by the belief it benefits society. - Belief about saving money poorly predicts energy conservation; may overestimate economic motives. Normative social influence is under detected (Schultz et al). Variations in normative appeals: Highlighting changes: 30% of Americans attempt to reduce their meat consumption Highlighting others motives: in the last 5 years, 30% of Americans have now started to make an effort to reduce meat consumption, 3 in 10 people have changed their behaviour. Static norms: Simply providing descriptive norms; no evidence of the change in behaviour Dynamic norms: highlights the change of a norm over time - Dynamic norms are successful in inspiring positive behaviour change towards sustainability, even stronger than static norms: - E.g. Anticipated change in the future; in the future more people will reduce meat consumption; people want to follow the future trend; pre-conformity. - E.g. self efficacy; other people are eating less meat i can too; dynamic norms increases the belief anything is possible. Pro-self motivated norms: descriptive norms driven by egoistic, self oriented norms ; people save energy to save money Prosocial motivated norms: descriptive norms driven by other oriented altruistic motives; people save energy to benefit society. Injunctive, moral norms regulate behaviours through self conscious emotions - Prosocial motivated descriptive norms --> perceived injunctive norms --> self conscious emotions --> behavioural intentions. - Self conscious emotions; anticipated guilt and shame; drive people to behave in morally appropriate ways about behaving consistently with norms. PERSONALITY: Big 5 qualities: · Openness · Conscientiousness · Extraversion · Agreeableness · Neuroticism Other in Hexaco: Honesty/ Humility: sincere fair, modest. Openness; environmentalism, abstract thinking and long term considerations, aesthetic appreciation for nature Conscientiousness: self control and self discipline; control oneself to engage in pro environmental behaviour Agreeableness: engage in PEB as prosocial action. Openness most prosocial > Conscientious less so (preferences for organisation and order suppress environmental action) > agreeableness less so (people not always view PEB as prosocial behaviour due to egoism). Personality and Tailored Communication: Gain v Loss Framing Gain framing: focus on desirable positive outcomes if adopting recommended behaviour e.g. by going green, this happens Loss framing: focus on undesirable negative outcomes if not adopting recommended behaviour. E.g. by not going green, this happens. LECTURE 6 SDO and PRO environmental behaviour: Why is SDO negatively associated with Pro Environmental Tendencies? Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) - Preferences for group based hierarchy and inequality - Those with high SDO desire to maintain status differences between groups and indivdiuals - Leading to preferences for hierarchy between humans and the natural world Why SDO? - Alternative perspective (centred on preferences for heirarchy) - High SDO indivdiuals support initiatives and polices which promote social heirarchy - Environmental exploitation seen as way to sustain social inequality through heirarchical distribution of resources - Negative association between SDO --> environmentalism reflects a preference for the unequal distribution of resources Possible to decrease SDO? Intergroup Contact: hanging out with different races and religions Contact hypothesis: Direct contact with outgroup members reduce intergroup prejudice - Helps build shared sense of identity - Quality of contact also matters; british international students having more frequent contact with international students had lower SDO Increasing cultural diversity within Organisations - It may help the organisation or employees to be environmentally friendly (potentially via reducing SDO) - SDO may not be the only reason Diversity benefits: - Multicultural people promote openness to experience - Key personality factor associated with PEB - Multicultural conditions enjoy higher openness to experience than local culture conditions LEGACY MOTIVES: Motives to build a legacy that will last beyond temporal constraints of a lifetime - Make life meaningful and continue to exist on some level after death - Important motivator of prosocial behaviour, particularly with situations where there are implications for the future generations (e.g. PEB) Factors enacting Legacy motivations: Wade Benzoni (2019) Death priming: - Reminds people of the inevitability of death and the desire to live - Acting on behalf of future generations (leaving legacies) can be a way to extend this life Affinity with future generations: - Reducing psychological distance between oneself and future generations is key to enacting legacy motives Power: - Capacity to influence others; control over valuable resources - Intergenerational contexts where power asymmetry is extreme, when people feel powerful they feel higher social responsibility and show greater intergenerational prosociality Resource valence: - Nature of resources can be framed differently; benefits v burdens - Thinking about potential burdens (v. benefits) can affect our legacy concerns as we pass on these conditions. CORE SOCIAL MOTIVES - Reducing psychological distance between oneself and future generations is key to enacting legacy motives Power: - Capacity to influence others; control over valuable resources - Intergenerational contexts where power asymmetry is extreme, when people feel powerful they feel higher social responsibility and show greater intergenerational prosociality Resource valence: - Nature of resources can be framed differently; benefits v burdens - Thinking about potential burdens (v. benefits) can affect our legacy concerns as we pass on these conditions. CORE SOCIAL MOTIVES Examples of use for each: Belong: Americans underestimate popularity of climate change policy support Understand: adverse weather patterns/ dangers in nature of climate change Control: Water bottle "saved x " amount of plastic bottle Self Enhance: climate change will affect you personally etc. not others Trust: Pope urging radical climate change response LECTURE 7 CONTROL CONDITION: We wish for you to remember a movie or TV show that you have seen recently. Everyone has typically watched many movies and TV shows; please choose an especially strong or memorable movie or TV show. In the space below, write as detailed a memory as you can, describing the movie or TV show and how it made you feel. Please write at least one full paragraph about the movie or TV show below. LEGACY CONDITION: For this writing task, we would like you to think about what you want future generations to remember you for when you're gone. In answering this question, you might think about ways in which you will have a positive impact on other people, skills or knowledge you will teach others, or aspects of your personality that you would like to be remembered for. In the space below, please write a brief essay describing your response to this question and try to be as honest as you can be. SYSTEM JUSTIFICATION and the ENVIRONMENT: System justification may have negative consequences for pro environmental attitudes and behaviours Eco problems are the result of current socioeconomic systems and practices Acknowledging eco problems is to admit that the status quo is not legitimate or beneficial May lead to the denial of eco problems System Justification Beliefs “Most policies serve the greater good.” “Society is set up so that people usually get what they deserve.” “American society needs to be radically restructured.” (reverse) Denial of Environmental Problems “The earth has plenty of natural resources if we just learn how to develop them.” “The balance of nature is strong enough to cope with the impacts of modern industrial nations.” ISSUES: Is System Justification Motivation Always Bad for the Environment? How can We Minimize the Negative Effects of System Justification Motivation? How can We Convince People with Strong System Justification Motivation? - Utilising framing in order to make PEB consistent with system justification SOCIAL IDENTITY THEORY: Social identity: formed from ones attachment to groups and understanding of self; ones self concept is made up of multiple social identities; intersectionality's. - Some groups are more interested than others in self concepts; which social identity is more salient depends on contextual factors and changes and interplays day to day. - People desire to positively differentiate themselves from others in their social groups; when social identity becomes salient; people behave like members of groups (depersonalisation) - This social identity content informs how ones norms actions goals and values are formed. THIS IS RELEVANT TO PEB BECAUSE: Applying the ideas of this theory to climate action: - Morality: people want to be considered morally sound within their social identity groups, and are more likely to admit faults; due to a 1) sense of responsibility, 2) repairability; belief in the ability to fix what is done. Collective guilt acts as a motive for climate action. Collective Guilt (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree) ▪ How much do you feel (1) guilty, (2) regretful, and (3) remorseful that Americans today produce greenhouse gas emissions (by driving automobiles and consuming electricity)? Paying Green Tax (1 = not at all, 5 = extremely) ▪ How willing are you to pay higher taxes on gasoline (20¢ per gallon), electricity ($15 per month), and income ($50 per year) to promote reductions in greenhouse gas emissions? Can motive to differentiate from your own group obstruct pro-environmental action? Political identity effect is more pronounced when political identity is primed. LECTURE 8 Do stereotypes about groups impede environmental action? INDIVIDUALISM V COLLECTIVISM Individualism: - Achieving personal goals - Expressing personal self (values, attitudes, beliefs and emotions) - Personal values, attitudes and beliefs are key antecedents of behaviour (behaviour is in live with attitudes and beliefs) Collectivism: - Achieving in group goals - Fitting in with social expectations (group values and norms) - Social norms are antecedents of behaviour (behaviour is in line with norms) Attitude-behaviour-gap Many people believe in climate change and are concerned about the environment, but they do not necessarily engage in PEB. - Do we expect cultural differences in attitudes-behaviour gap in environmental actions? Cultural differences in predictors of pro-environmental action Variables: - Personal environmental concern - Perceived descriptive social norms; prevalence of people in America or Japan who actively engage in pro environmental behaviours - Outcome: preference for green products Within nation variation Social norms are more effective in affecting PEB for Japanese people Individualised environmental concern is more effective in affecting PEB in European American people Idiocentrism: person level individualism v allocentrism: person level collectivism People with different cultural orientations behave differently. Association between climate change beliefs and PEB varies according to individual level cultural orientations. Belief in climate change predicted PEB more strongly amongst less collectivist people than stronger collectivist people No effect for individualism scores EMIC v ETIC approach: Studying cultural processes does not necessarily require cross cultural comparisons; culture can be studied by delving into a given culture. "etic" refers to cross cultural study whereas "emic" refers to research fully focusing on one cultural with little to no cross cultural research. SIDES OF BELIEF WITH REGARD TO PEB: Both notions of stewardship aswell as belief in gods control are equally poignant to action of PEB. - These are found especially in abrahamic religions Stewardship: we are responsible as his stewards of the earth Belief in God's control: God controls the events of the earth, he will take care of issues Dominion Beliefs: Belief that the earth was created by God to serve humans, and thus humans have the rights to use it for their own need. - “God said, Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.” (Genesis 1:26) Religious Fundamentalism - Belief that there is one set of religious teachings that contain basic and inherent truths about humanity and deity - Rigid thinking styles and thus negative attitudes towards social movements and status quo challenging Spirituality - A sense of connection to the divine or something greater  - Associated with greater prosociality --> greater PEB Supernatural punishment - Monitoring behaviour, rewarding/ punishing accordingly, promotes positive prosocial cooperative behaviours and PEB. - Fear for divine punishment can promote pro-environmental behaviors or prevent anti-environmental behaviors LECTURE 9 In an ANU study taken in class, shown that independence (individualism) show higher relational coefficient than Interdependence (collectivism) on PEB Behaviour change by altering consequences: · People do what they do to obtain positive consequences or to avoid negative consequences · Immediacy and certainty; Consequences are more powerful when they appear immediately and they are certain to occur after a behaviour Rewards v Penalties ▪ Psychological reactance: A process in which people act in the opposite way to the intention of persuasion attempts, in order to restore their lost sense of freedom ▪ Penalties make undesired behaviors more costly, thereby limiting people’s freedom to behave as they choose. Strong psychological reactance can occur. People may try to escape penalties. Negative attitudes towards the agent administering consequences Monetary v. Non monetary consequences ▪ Monetary consequences are powerful; Subsidies, rebates, fines, taxes - Tax deductible donations to charities ▪ Financial rewards and penalties can make people ‘forget’ about the moral aspects of pro-environmental behavior (onset of a business mindset). How can we avoid that monetary rewards and penalties cancel out moral motivation to act pro-environmentally? - Communication: Present monetary consequences as recognition and appreciation for moral behavior (i.e., pro-environmental behavior), but not as ultimate goals ▪ Non-monetary consequences: Praise, compliments, candy, privileges, and public recognition; these promote pro-environmental behavior without inducing a business mindset. REAL CONDITION: WARMTH CONDITION/ DEVELOPMENT CONDITION - For deniers; real condition is the least affective framing; warmth and development framing more effective - For supporters; doesn't matter as much; they always show strong motivation for PEB SOCIAL IDENTITY THEORY: - Social identity; part of an individuas self concept derived from their knowledge and attachment to different groups - Self concept made up from a range of social identities · People desire to positively differentiate their own groups from other groups (helps enhance self esteem) - People want to percieve their groups as positive; warmth and development appeals to such motives Do these messages alter consequences of PEB? - In a way... But more about changing expected consequences, before behavior actually occurs Other Strategies: Information provision: Most widely used intervention ▪ Two types: 1) Information about environmental problems 2) Information that helps people to take actions ▪ Knowledge-deficit model: The reason people do not change behavior is that they do not have proper knowledge (about environmental problems and what to do about them) - Effective for attitude change, but not so much for behavior change Goal setting ▪ Setting clear performance targets (e.g., 8% decrease in water consumption) ▪ More effective when goals are - Clear - High enough but realistic - Achievable within a short period of time - Combined with feedback ▪ Implementation intentions: If-then plans that spell out when, where, and how a set goal has to be put into action “If I am in a situation X, then I will do Y” Commitment ▪ Asked to sign a pledge to change behavior ▪ Cognitive dissonance: The tension that arises when one’s attitudes do not align with one’s behavior - "i have already been in the shower 30 mins already, i pledged to take a shorter shower" Prompting ▪ A short message or sign that draws attention to a specific behavior in a given situation ▪ Simple reminders that encourage people to behave in an environmentally friendly way ▪ Assumption: The target group has a positive attitude or intentions to do the behavior, so just need a reminder ▪ More effective if placed directly where the requested behavior occurs - Signs at lights, taps Feedback · Giving people information about their performance · More effective, when feedback is given more frequently - Daily > Weekly > Monthly ▪ Can be provided in different forms - "you used 66% more electricity this week; this cost you X" - "you used 66% more electricity this week; adding X pounds of air pollutions" · Public health feedback is more effective than financial cost feedback (Asensio & Delmas 2015) Two Key Aspects in Behavior Change ▪ Friction- Minimize Barriers Reduce hassle; remove things that make the behavior bothering (e.g., making pro environmental options default) ▪ Motivation- Maximize Energy Appeal to various human motivations; being good parents, money, loss aversion, belonging, status, etc. LECTURE 10: CONSUMER AND CORPORATIONS (GUEST LECTURE) 1. Why consumers matter: - Consumers collective lifestyle change will influence sustainability and production of new more socially responsible products - Carbon emissions; positive changes are needed to stimulate sustainability agenda - The market is a democracy where every penny gives the 'right to vote' - "Consumer citizenship"; evaluate consequence of their purchases. - Consumers are employees, citizens, part of governments, corporate companies: this makes them important agents of change. 2. Relationship between corporates and consumers; consumer sovereignty v marketing strategy Power gain between consumers and corporates: CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY: " Consumers are active participants to sustainability"; not influenced by corporate marketing - Consumer sovereignty: firms are steer men bound to unconditionally obey the consumers orders - Organisation continually adjusting their offerings in the context of attracting and maintaining a consumption base - Consumer movement (e.g. blm, me too, extinction rebellion) will help corporates adjust and follow these standards. Conflict paradigm: activists mobilise resources to disrupt markets to enact change e.g. boycott Radical imagination paradigm: collective process through shared experiences, language, stories, ideas and art; common possibility and shared understanding e.g. meat substitute, fair trade Strategic coalition paradigm: cooperation of companies and consumers to effect change: e.g. anti slavery or ethical products, consumer raises the funds for the company to make changes. - If company matches willingness to pay this is more effective. 'little me' v. cooperation standard. "my consumption does count". MARKETING STRATEGY: organisations have agendas and produce what is in their best interest; in doing so they can seek to persuade and manipulate consumers; perspective of consumer is limited. - Warmth and competence: low competence/ high competence; low warmth/ high warmth; as a company you would want to be perceived as both high competence and high warmth - sustainability initiative may be effective to push warmth perception Attribution theory: consumers as receiver of sustainability push; why is company doing this? - Genuine motive - Self seeking motive - Forced by stakeholder · Persuasion model (consumers): sceptical of promotion, message and communication · Consumers go through attribution process with persuasion model of knowledge; makes it harder to make warmth impression; harder to affect genuine CSR motive. - Sustainability effects can be negated by irresponsible behaviour by past or present in the company. 3. How can corporate manage sustainability "CSO role" CEO RISK: CEO perceived as company itself CEO activism: public stance over social/ political/ environmental issues that have no relation to the profit of their business: AFFECTS corporate reputation. - Affects corporate reputations - Firms warmth - May be related to self serving motive; may exacerbate negative impact. Crisis communication: - Tensions between legal counsel and communication counsel are well established · Strategic silence · Apology · Emotional Communication: most effective crisis communication; leads to more positive reputation of company; compared to a rational response. - Deters negative impact of negative events Ethical approach to market: Virtue ethics emphasizes character and virtues of agent: - Criticises deontology which focuses on action - Criticises utilitarianism which focuses on outcomes of actions · Perspective on marketing: "more is better" v "enough is enough" - Enough is enough; living wages, price including externalities etc. - Questioning the motive of profit maximization: patagonia gives company away. LECTURE 11: CSR: employee perspective Examples of bad CSR: - Volkswagen emissions scandal: employee loyalty may go down as people feel cheated - Sushi bay scandal: went into liquidation, deliberately exploiting migrant workers Managerial ethics - Ethics; code of moral principles and values that governs the behaviours of a person or group with respect to what is right and wrong. - Ethical issue is present in a situation when the actions of a person or organisation may harm or benefit others Domain of Ethics Not super clear cut: ethical dilemmas; mandating covid 19 vaccines; (individual freedom v business) Utilitarian approach: greatest good greatest number - Mandate vax - Monitor employee use of the internet - Save those who are less likely to die Moral rights approach: best maintain the rights of people affected by them - Any acts against fundamental human rights or liberties are immoral - Mandating vaccines is against liberty - Monitor use of internet is against privacy Justice Approach; based on standards of equity and fairness - Distributive justice; fairness of outcomes of resource allocations among individuals or groups e.g. male workers higher salaries than females, having quotas for minorities - Procedural justice: fairness of rules and decision process used to determine outcomes.  E.g. promotion committees consist of members with different genders, fair procedure but less ethnic minorities in outcomes. Affirmative Action: set of policies and practices within an organization seeking to benefit marginalized groups. "positive discrimination". Practical Approach: bases decisions off prevailing standards of the profession and larger society, taking the interests of all stakeholders into account - Decisions considered ethical if one feels comfortable to share with family, others and society. CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY: management obligation to make choices and take actions that will contribute to the welfare and interest of society, not just the organisation - Shareholder focused to stakeholder focus - Stakeholder; anyone who is affected by organisations actions Perceptual map of consumers Traditional perspective: concern for shareholders; making profit New perspectives: build diversity, inclusivity, employee wellbeing. Safe and high quality goods and services. Dealing fairly and ethically with suppliers. Protecting the environment. Fair Trade Products: B-Corp: high standards of environmental performance, accountability and transparency. Corporate Sustainability: corporations have embraced the idea of sustainable development - Growth that generates wealth and meets needs of current and future generations - Achieving financial goals in socially/ environmentally responsibly. STRATEGY: triple-bottom-line "people-planet-profit" - Measuring organizational success based off three key elements of sustainability Consequences of CSR: significant impact on various outcomes Financial Performance: positive relationship with ethical and socially responsible practices (high sales, return on sales, growth) Job interest: people want to work for companies that are environmentally and socially responsible (particularly young people) - Value signalling: CSR serve as signals of organizations core values and priorities; increasing attractiveness to employees. - Refer back to schwartz value theory. - The CSR condition which exaggerated the social responsibility of the same company had results in different reporting of observed company values - CSR perceive self transcendence, less likely to perceive self enhancement; prefer to work for the organization with high self transcendence WHY SELF TRANSCENDENCE? - Social identity theory; people derive a sense of self esteem; positively differentiate group from other groups; want to belong to a CSR minded workplace as a reflection of their values. - Self esteem, meaningfulness, organizational pride, collective self esteem (value of the worth of the group to which they belong) Outcomes - Job satisfaction - Less turnover - Organisational identification: sense of oneness - Organizational commitment: psychological attachment and loyalty to the organisation - Organizational citizenship behaviour: voluntary commitment within an organisation that is not part of his or her contractual tasks Other points: - CSR positive effects depend on how the company treats employees internally: mismatch between external CSR and internal CSR this will decrease its positive effects. Spending resources to take care of employees--> higher CSR - Increases organizational attractiveness, only when company has high HIHRS Why? - Perceive the organization as inauthentic; company will "greenwash" in their external CSR but not genuinely care about their workers in their internal CSR. - When doing well on internal CSR, employees see company as more authentic, higher HIHRS