n docade uhat guonsibreaso

Numerous studies have examined motivations for environmental responsibility (e.g. Annandale and Taplin, 2003; Bansal and

Journal of International Management 14 (2008) 377390

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of International ManagementRoth, 2000; Khanna and Anton, 2002) as well as the motivations for social responsibility (e.g. Anderson and Bieniaszewska, 2005;Bendell et al., 2005; Bichta, 2003; Tullberg, 2005), and there is increasing trend in looking at corporate social and environmentalresponsibility (CSER) in unison (e.g. Egri et al., 2004; Lund-Thomsen, 2004).

This paper builds upon the existing literature by, rstly, developing a model that illustrates the relationships between variousinuences on CSER, and, secondly, exploring how this model applies to one rm, Scandinavian Airlines (SAS), by using an in-depthcase study approach. This model-case study approach is used to explore the following questions:

1. What internal, sector-specic and external factors inuence the interpretation of a rm's motivations and, ultimately, its level ofcommitment to CSER?corporate social andenvironmental respcorporations are realizing for varying2. How do the motivations for social and env

Testing the model on one rm allowsinterpreted within the organization. Prakash

Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 519 888 4567x3548E-mail addresses: jklynes@fes.uwaterloo.ca (J.K. Ly

1075-4253/$ see front matter 2008 Elsevier Inc. Adoi:10.1016/j.intman.2007.09.004ility sits, tornbetweensocial consciousness and shareholderprots. Increasingly, however,ns that being environmentally and socially conscious makes good business sense.Over the past few years the CanadiaAmerica and beyond. Corporations aremset in laws and institutional structures tto unlocking the reasons why corporations are choosing (or not) to commit to CSER. If thesereasons are known, they can be used to develop appropriate mechanisms to ensure that CSER isan important aspect of a company's decision-making regime. Findings of the case study providefurther evidence that motivations cannot be looked at in isolation of sectoral and culturalcontexts. Secondly, it was seen how catalysts the lens through which a rm sees andinterprets motivations can have an important impact in its level of commitment to CSER.

2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

umentary The Corporation has been making waves at business schools throughout Northp of individualswhose values, goals and ideals often clashwith the rigour and inexibilityide the operation of corporations (Bakan, 2004). It is within this context that the issue ofresponsibilityMotivationsAirline industrySwedenCultureScandinavian Airlines

1. IntroductionMotivations for corporate social and environmental responsibility: A casestudy of Scandinavian Airlines

Jennifer K. Lynes, Mark AndrachukEnvironment and Resource Studies, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history:Received 1 February 2006Accepted 9 September 2007Available online 25 October 2008

The term corporate social and environmental responsibility (CSER) is gaining popularity withsome studies attempting to escape narrow denitions of corporate responsibility. This paperaims to develop a model that illustrates how various external, sector-specic and internalinuences for CSER are interpreted, and then shaped into action at the level of the rm. Usingan in-depth case study approach, this model is then applied to one rm Scandinavian Airlines(SAS). Developing an understanding of the gurative black box of SAS's motivations contributesKeywords:

Corporate social and environmentalironmental responsibility of a rm compare in terms of similarities and differences?

us to look at the relationship between the inuences on CSER and how they are(2000) cites that there is an inadequate understanding of the internal processes that

7; fax: +1 519 746 0292.nes), mark.andrachuk@gmail.com (M. Andrachuk).

ll rights reserved.

378 J.K. Lynes, M. Andrachuk / Journal of International Management 14 (2008) 377390lead a rm to adopt, or not adopt, environmental policies, arguing that an examination of intra-rm dynamics is required tosupplement the existing literature on external pressures that rms face (see also Gilley et al., 2000). Developing an understandingof the gurative black box of SAS's motivations contributes to unlocking the reasons why corporations are choosing (or not) tocommit to CSER. If these reasons are known, they can be used to develop appropriate mechanisms to ensure that CSER is animportant aspect of a company's decision-making regime. Although some studies have looked at a survey of sectors or cross-sectoral companies (e.g. Egri et al., 2004; Lund-Thomsen, 2004), few studies have examinedmotivations for CSER in depthwith onecompany. This is the rst study to look at CSER in relation to the airline industry.

The airline industry provides an appealing backdrop to this paper. To date, much of the literature concerning themotivations forCSER concentrates on heavy industries such as themining, chemical and energy sectors; moreover, there is a paucity of research onCSER in the service sector (i.e. Cspedes-Lorente et al., 2003; Kirk,1998). Although commercial aviation is part of the service sector,it possesses several characteristics similar to those of manufacturing industries, including intense regulation, high entry barriers,high capital costs, and tendencies towards oligopolies (Clancy, 2001). The airline industry thus presents an interestingjuxtaposition between these two sectors. Furthermore, air emissions, the largest environmental impact of aircraft, are oftenexcluded from regulatory attempts at controlling environmental impact, thus, demonstrating a need for CSER in the airline sector.

2. Dening CSER: various interpretations of one common goal

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) can be dened in basic terms as the voluntary commitment of a rm to contribute to socialand environmental goals (European Commission, 2002). Under this denition, environmental responsibility is an implied part ofsocial responsibility, even if the word environment is not included in the CSR acronym. Indeed, numerous studies use the termCSR in discussions on corporate greening (Graff Zivin and Small, 2005; Fig, 2005; Tschopp, 2005). One argument for this is that thenatural environment is considered one of many stakeholders, and thus, if a rm is acting socially responsible to its stakeholders,being accountable to the natural environment is a part of this larger responsibility. In recent times, the term corporate social andenvironmental responsibility (CSER) has gained popularity with some studies that are attempting to escape narrow denitions ofcorporate responsibility (Egri et al., 2004; Lund-Thomsen, 2004; McIntosh, 2003; Rosenberg, 2004; Schaefer, 2004). The denitionof CSER is similar to CSR, in that it refers to the commitment of rms to contribute to both social and environmental goals. Commonthemes emerge from the literature that help further dene CSER, including: regulatory compliance, voluntary initiatives,accountability, communication and transparency as well as institutionalization of environmental and social issues (based ondiscussions by Fischer and Schot, 1993; Garsten, 2003; Gibson, 1999; Lund-Thomsen, 2004; Lyon, 2004; McIntosh, 2003; Oketch,2004; Prakash, 2000; Rondinelli and Berry, 2000; Welford and Starkey, 1996). Our use of the term CSER is intended to draw outcontent from the literature that explores the relationships between motivations for both social and environmental responsibility.

2.1. Developing a model of motivations for corporate social and environmental responsibility at the level of the rm

What drives a rm to be committed to social and environmental issues can be unpacked into dynamic layers of internal, sector-specic and external inuences. While many studies provide descriptions of a rm's CSER motivations both within and acrosssectors (e.g. Bansal and Roth, 2000; Egri et al., 2004; Henriques and Sadorsky, 1996; Sharma, 2000), there is a need to bring thisliterature together in away that addresses, in a systematic way, the interaction of these inuences at the level of the rm. Based onan extensive review of the literature, we have developed a model (Fig. 1) to illustrate how a rm rst processes and interpretsmotivations derived from external and sector-specic inuences, and then make decisions regarding its level of commitmenttowards social and/or environmental issues.

There are four parts to the model. Part I introduces four broad external and sector-specic systems of inuence (marketsystems, political systems, social systems and scientic systems) that impact how a rm operates (Renn, 2001). Part II lists a rm'spossible motivations for CSER, based on combinations of the four systems of inuence. Part III proposes ways inwhichmotivationsaremobilizedwithin a rm through various catalysts such as internal leadership and the nancial position of the organization. PartIV presents the resulting level of commitment to CSER that a rm demonstrates based on its interpretation of Parts IIII of themodel. The four components of this model provide a systematic approach to analyzing motivations for CSER at the level of the rmand will be used in this as a basis for discussing the results of the SAS case study.

2.1.1. Part I: the four systems of inuenceFirms are inuenced by a variety of external and sector-specic factors such as available technology, political leadership, the

state of the economy, industry standards and agreements and so on. These inuences can be more broadly described in terms offour systems of inuence (Renn, 2001: 4289):

Themarket systemwhere policy development is based on a costbenet analysis of the advantages to the companywithin themarketplace.

Politicalinstitutional system where policy development is based on the political culture and system of government withinwhich the business operates.

Scientic system where policy development is made based on scientic knowledge of cause and consequence. Social system where policy development is made as a result of the sharing of knowledge about market, political and scienticsystems.

Fig. 1. A conceptual model of the inuences, motivations and catalysts on a rm's level of commitment towards corporate social and environmental responsibility.

379J.K. Lynes, M. Andrachuk / Journal of International Management 14 (2008) 377390

380 J.K. Lynes, M. Andrachuk / Journal of International Management 14 (2008) 377390Renn's (2001) discussion of these four systems applies to public policy development, however, the position taken in this paperis that these four systems are also relevant in corporate commitment and decision-making (see also Lynes and Dredge, 2006). Notonly does each of the fours systems inuence how a rm operates, the relationships between the systems are also noteworthy(illustrated by the diagonal arrows on the model). For example, a country's political system and social system can lead businessesto seek legitimation in the form of acknowledgment as a good corporate citizen.

2.1.2. Part II: motivationsThe four systems of inuence help determine what will motivate a particular rm. A number of themes emerge from the

literature regarding a rm's motivations for social and environmental commitment. These themes are based on discussions byAnnandale and Taplin (2003), Bansal and Roth (2000), Bull (2003), Henriques and Sadorsky (1996), Kiernan (2001), Prakash (2000),Sharma (2000), and Tullberg (2005) and include:

Long-term nancial strategy (e.g. investing in efcient and low-emission technologies); Eco-efciencies (e.g. reduction in expenses as a result of savings achieved through waste reduction); Competitive advantage; Good corporate citizenship; Image enhancement; Stakeholder pressures; and A desire to avoid or delay regulatory action.

Not all of these motivations apply to every rm; and some motivations are more relevant to the E in CSER than the S. Forexample, literature on corporate environmental responsibility often makes reference to nancial motivations achievable in theshort to medium term through eco-efciencies (e.g. Kiernan, 2001; Hart, 1995), while the direct gains that can be made by a rmthat commits to social responsibility are less tangible.

2.1.3. Part III: catalystsCatalysts help shape inuences by acting as a medium for encouraging/discouraging CSER. Examples of catalysts include the

nancial position of a rm, internal leadership within the rm as well as the culture in which the rm operates. We dene culturehere using Annandale and Taplin's (2003: 907) denition of jurisdictional culture: the differences in countries' languages,religions, social organizations, laws, politics, education systems, values and attitudes affect the relationship between individuals,organizations and the political domain. Internal leadership, in the form of an environmental champion is often identied as beingstrongly inuential in the degree to which a rm takes on corporate environmental responsibility, while social champions do notappear as prominently in the empirical evidence on motivations for social responsibility.

When considering culture as a catalyst, Egri et al. (2004) assert that CSERmay bemore effective in certain cultures. Branzei et al.(2001: 288) note that culture shapes individual values and serves as a broad context in guiding the actions of individual andcorporate actors, endorsing specic ideologies governing the relationships between rms and their natural environment, andshaping social expectations regarding the adequacy of corporate acts. Hofstede (1984) contends that the ways in which anorganization operates including motivations, leadership and decision-making is a function of national culture. While thesestudies acknowledge the importance of culture in enhancing the commitment of corporations to CSER, the importance in a rm'sinterpretation of these inuences is under-explored on a case-by-case basis.

2.1.4. Level of commitmentWe use the term commitment here to encompass the degree to which a rmwill participate in CSER in terms of its pledges to

take a course of action, responsibility taken for its action, level of involvement with environmental and social issues, as well as itsdedication to improve the rm's performance in these areas (Keogh and Polonsky, 1998; Winn and Angell, 2000; Zeffane et al.,1995). A rm's commitment to CSER could be demonstrated through corporate policies, personnel employed to oversee social andenvironmental performance within the rm, external validation and reporting mechanisms that a rm uses as well as internalindicators for continual improvement.

Based on the four main components of this model, the motivations for commitment to CSER of SAS will be explored.

3. Research approach

Against this background, a case study of SAS's reasons for adopting corporate social and environmental practices wasconducted. Data collection focused on identifying motivations and exploring attitudes of SAS representatives towardsenvironmental management and social responsibility of the airline in relation to our CSER model. This case study used a mixedmethod approach that included conducting in-depth interviews and document analysis. More specically, we examined SAS'senvironmental, nancial and sustainability reports for the last ten years as well as SAS's internal procedures regardingenvironmental and social issues. To determine the motivations inuencing SAS's approach to corporate social and environmentalresponsibility, 32 semi-structured interviews were conducted, including nine preliminary interviews to gain backgroundinformation and determine appropriate questions to include in the second set of interviews (see Table 1). A schedule ofinterviewees was developed initially from contacts with industry members and from the preliminary interviews.

381J.K. Lynes, M. Andrachuk / Journal of International Management 14 (2008) 377390While many empirical studies of motivations for CSR or CSER focus on gathering information from the environmental/sustainability manager of an organization, the range of management and employees interviewed for this study allowed a moreholistic perspective to be developed in relation to the environmental and social motivations of SAS.

The main set of interviews was conducted in Stockholm over a period of six weeks in 2002, at SAS's headquarters inFrsundavik, Sweden. Follow-up interviews were conducted by telephone and in person in Stockholm in 2005 and 2006 to furtherinvestigate the social dimension of SAS's sustainability policy (which was only ofcially formulated in 2003). The interviewsgenerally lasted between 1 and 2 h.

During the interviews, a diagramwas given to interviewees to evoke discussion about what they perceived as inuences for SAS(see Lynes, 2003). Based largely on the model presented in Fig. 1, but tailored specically to the airline industry, the diagram wasdeveloped from a combination of previous research in this area (Lynes, 1999), reviews of the literature, airline industry reports anddata collected from the preliminary interviews that were conducted in 2001. The list of external, industry and internal inuenceswas not meant to be an exhaustive inventory, but rather an instrument to provoke discussion. The tool proved to be an effectiveway of getting the interviewees to talk extensively about the issues being researched and resulted in a rich set of data that could beapplied to the model.

All interviews were transcribed in full by the principle researcher. A deductive approach was then used to analyze the collecteddata. Based on the model, the information obtained from the interviews as well as from SAS's internal and external reports wasanalyzed by coding the results into the major themes such as external inuences, sector-specic inuences, market systems,science, political/institutional systems, social systems, catalysts and motivations. The principle researcher was responsible for thethematic coding and analysis of the data.

4. Results and discussion

The results section is structured around the model presented in Fig. 1. The rst half describes the four systems of inuences forSAS, while the second half focuses on the motivations and catalysts that inuence SAS's commitment to social and environmentalresponsibility.

4.1. The four systems of inuences with respect to the airline industry and Scandinavia

Table 1Summary of interviews conducted for SAS case study

Preliminary interviews Core interviews

Department/organization Number of interviews Department(s) within SAS Number of interviews

International airline industry organizations 4 Environment and sustainability 4Other international airlines 3 Purchasing and procurement 3SAS environmental/sustainability department 2 Flight operations, aircraft maintenance and eet development 3

Cabin operations 2Product management and catering 2Marketing and communications 2Finance and investor relations 2Other interviewsInternational airline industry organizations 3Swedish airline industry organization 1SAS supplier 1

Total 9 Total 23A description of the forces at play bothwithin Scandinavia and the airline industry help to set the context of themilieu inwhichSAS operates. These four systems of inuence form the basis for the motivations that were identied in the case study of SAS.

4.1.1. Market systemsAir travel has sustained almost continual growth over the past four decades. In recent years, a signicant contributor to this

growth has been increasing tourism demand and changing leisure patterns (European Commission, 1999). Deregulation and therestructuring of the airline industry have accentuated price sensitivities of the market. Many large international air carriers havemet the emergence of low cost airlines with the development of their own low cost service. These services are aimed at the leisuretraveller or the price sensitive businessperson and illustrate that the industry is moving into a new, highly competitive phase interms of passenger service. As a result, airlines are feeling market pressure to lower prices, remove some of the more costlyservices, and to develop a more efcient and competitive product (Pilling, 2004).

Although the airline industry has a history of being highly regulated, market-based mechanisms (such as tradable permits forCO2 emissions and airport landing charges aimed at high-polluting aircraft) are increasingly appearing on the agenda of bothgovernment and industry bodies such as International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). The European airline industry, inparticular, is embracing market-based mechanisms. Within this context, long-term policymaking is needed in order to suit thelength of time an airline needs to renew its aircraft eet (which can take as long as ten years from start to nish). Within

Scandinavia, Sweden has embraced the use of charges on aircraft emissions to encourage airlines to use best availableenvironmental technology. These charges are currently focused around SAS's main hub: the StockholmArlanda airport.

4.1.2. Political/institutional systemAir travel's close association with globalization requires the aviation industry to carefully consider its role in relation to economic,

382 J.K. Lynes, M. Andrachuk / Journal of International Management 14 (2008) 377390social andenvironmental sustainability. Airlines are generally basedoutof one country, butoperate cross-nationally, in that theymayytomany countries. They are therefore subject to the rules, or political/institutional structure, of every airport at which they land eventhough they may only be there for a few hours. Commercial aviation is also governed by the International Civil Aviation Organization,which develops international standards for the industry and, in particular, sets noise and emissions standards for aircraft worldwide.

From a political perspective within Sweden, the Swedish Social Democratic ideology is deeply entrenched in Swedish culture asa result of over 40 years of national leadership by the Social Democratic party. Social democracy in Sweden is largely based on thepremise that what is good for society is emphasized over what is good for the individual (Childs, 1936; Maccoby, 1991; Tilton,1990). Basic social democratic values include: equality, democracy, freedom, solidarity, efciency, work and security (Tilton, 1990;see also Tingsten, 1973). In Scandinavia there is a high level of social security, high average wages (i.e. the average low wage ishigher and the average highwage is lower than, say, North American averages), a very powerful labourmovement with the highestrate of union membership in the world, the highest proportion of women in national parliament of all EU countries (e.g. Sweden:44.3%), strong labour rights for women and a high level of cooperation between organizations and the state. The stability of theScandinavian countries along with a solid education system and strong healthcare and social security systems means that peoplecan concentrate on other issues, such as the environmental responsibility of rms.

From an airline industry perspective, there is a strong push for political and social legitimation to be a good corporate citizenbecause of the negative image associated with the environmental impacts of air travel. This push is coming from airlinesthemselves but also from industry bodies such as the International Air Transportation Association and the Air Transport ActionGroup. Airlines have a tendency to represent, and be representative of, their home country (Clancy, 2001). As ag carriers of thecountry in which they are based, national carriers have a certain responsibility to uphold a positive image for their country.

4.1.3. Science systemThe scientic dimension of corporate environmental commitment plays a formative role in the airline industry as airlines are, to

a certain extent, bound by the available technology offered by aircraft and engine manufacturers. Furthermore, the scienticuncertainty surrounding the impact of air travel on climate change is also putting pressure on the industry to adopt theprecautionary principle in its management of the environmental impacts of aviation (Penner et al., 1999).

4.1.4. Social systemWith respect to social systems in Scandinavia, management styles are very process-oriented and are largely based on

consensus, while still adhering to the strong hierarchical structure of the organization. Despite a high level of bureaucracy, theymanage to also maintain a high level of efciency (Maccoby, 1991; Schramm-Nielsen et al., 2004). Work is humanized withconsideration for human issues, the local community and the environment and being in the forefront, not just the bottom line(Schramm-Nielsen et al., 2004: 166). According to Hofstede (1984), Swedes, in particular, place greater importance on conservationof the environment than on economic growth. Scandinavian countries put great emphasis on equal opportunity and good workingconditions. In this regard, Scandinavians have the reputation of being leaders in the area of social responsibility to the extent thatmany of the social principles that exist on a global scale today are based on Scandinavian values.

As proposed in Fig. 1, the four systems of inuence described in Section 4.1, and the conuence of relationships between them,help to frame the factors that affect motivations for corporate social and environmental responsibility at the level of the rm. Thesefour systems of inuence are largely based on a combination of external and sector-specic inuences. By using this information asa background to the case study of SAS, we can now examine the specic motivations for CSER that are present within the airline.

4.2. Background of SAS

SAS has its main headquarters in Stockholm, Sweden, with two other bases in Oslo and Copenhagen. The airlines serves23 million passengers per annum on domestic, inter-Scandinavian, European and Intercontinental routes (SAS, 2005)1 and is partof the larger SAS Group, which includes hotels, other airlines as well as airline support services. The holding company SAS Group is50% state-owned (Sweden 21.4%, Norway 14.3%, Denmark 14.3%) with the remaining 50% being publicly traded.

SAS has been identied as a leader in environmental commitment by its suppliers and other airlines aswell as by representativesof international organizations such as the Air Transport Action Group (ATAG) and the International Air Transportation Association(IATA)2. For example, in 1997 SAS became the rst airline to have its environmental report examined, veried, and validated by anexternal auditor. The airline has also made considerable investments in best available environmental technology for its aircraft.

1 This gure does not include the passengers travelling on other SAS Group-owned airlines. The total number of passengers travelling on all SAS Group airlinesin 2005 was 36.3 million.

2 This assertion is based on Middleton and Hawkins (1999) as well as personal communications with the (former) Head of Sustainable Business Unit, BritishAirways, 4 Nov., 2002; Environmental Manager, Qantas, 17 October, 2002; Executive Director, ATAG, 28 June, 2002; IATA representative, 6 June, 2001).

SASenvirotriple

SensavingdemanSAS reenviroof onerelatio

Thecommand ex

Dire Inve

383J.K. Lynes, M. Andrachuk / Journal of International Management 14 (2008) 377390 Operational changes aimed at minimizing environmental taxes and charges; and Boosted earnings bymaintaining ethical credibility and avoiding costs incurred by having a bad environmental image or reputation First-mover advantages of being one of the environmental leaders in the industry Improved productivity of employees through sense of pride Better investor relations couldbe a future sellingpoint for the airline (to both attract corporate clients and increase shareholder value).

The categories identied ranged from direct short-term benets to long-term investments aimed at being a viable player in thecurrent and emerging trends of environmental management. In other words, the nancial gains of SAS's environmentalmanagement are two-fold: money saved and money earned.

Edstrm (1991) cites that in the case of SAS, management bymedia has been an important part of creating a positive image forthe company, in part, to achieve better negotiating power with the government. Similarly, in our study, interviews with seniormanagers at SAS felt that a positive environmental image added overall value to the company particularly when it came tonegotiations with government and industry bodies regarding anticipated regulations or standards.

I want to underline that these investments [in newaircraft] have beenmade primarily to improve SAS's competitiveness andexploit the potential of this growingmarket. The environmental gains are an added, and very valuable bonus that I believe willenhance our image and highlight our role in the Scandinavian tradition of conserving nature (Stenberg in SAS, 2000:6).Deputy CEO demonstrated a clear understanding of the potential and actual nancial benets associated with environmentalitment aswell as strategic advantages of being a good corporate citizen. From the discussionwith the interviewees (bothwithinternal to SAS), several categories emerged within the spectrum of the nancial benets associated with corporate greening:

ct and often immediate cost savings through eco-efciencies (i.e. the low-hanging fruit);stment in green technology that will result in long-term savings;Chief Financial Ofcer) of SAS discussed how being a good corporate citizen intuitively makes good business sense:

I think corporate policy is the key strong willwewant to be recognized as a company who takes care of the environment.The Environmental Report, whichwe havewon several prizes for, is only mirroring the attitude it's a matter of being good tosociety even from an opportunistic point of view, we need to be recognized as a good citizen, regardless of what we get paidfor it. The cost performance is not the driving force, but I sense thatwhat is good for the environment is also paying off. If we dothings in a way which makes people be more committed, more concerned about doing the right things, even from anenvironmental perspective, thenwe're probably also spending less resources and [money]. I haven't, measured anything, I justsense that it's a good correlation.ior management indicated that cost savings from environmental actions over the long term are important. In addition tomoney, management at SAS believe that it can boost earnings by gaining and maintaining corporate customers who areding environmental responsibility of their suppliers because of requirements for certications such as ISO 14000. Similarly,quires their suppliers to complete an environmental checklist. A negative environmental report from a human rights ornmental organization can have an immediate effect on SAS's bottom line even if it is a result of environmental negligenceof SAS's suppliers, and not of the airline itself (SAS, 2002). Several SAS managers discussed the intricate and complexnship between environmental commitment and the nancial incentives of corporate greening. The Deputy CEO (and formerannual nancial report into one document. In 2003 the year SAS signed on to the Nordic network of Global Compact the airline'syearly reporting became an annual and sustainability report. This transition to sustainability reporting is reective of SAS's movetowards sustainability management, as opposed to its previous system of managing social and environmental issues separately.

4.3. Motivations at SAS

4.3.1. Environmental responsibilityThe introduction of new technologies that involve cleaner production and lower production costs (with subsequent benets for

the airline's image) underpin one of the main motivations for SAS with respect to environmental commitment: nancial costbenets of environmental management. SASmanagement indicated interest in reducing costs by employing energy andwater andwaste saving techniques. In SAS's rst Environmental Report (SAS, 1996) the airline stated that these types of projects wereplanned to be, for the most part, protable within one to two years. Personnel and management, however, cited both the short-term and long-term paybacks of investing in environmental management and best available technology:

I don't think it's one motivating factor. It depends who you speak to. I would say that, to me, efciency and costs areimportant factors. The environmental work should hold a payback either in direct cost cuts or return in investment in ourimage. There should be a real value it's not just for the sake of the environment, but also for the sake of the company. Inthe end I believe that if you have a good environmental policy and play by those rules, you'll end up saving money(Environment and Health Coordinator, SAS).cites in its 2004 Annual and Sustainability Report that its goal is to create long-term growth for shareholderswith social andnmental responsibility being part of this larger goal (SAS, 2005). As far back as 2000, SAS began mentioning the concept of thebottom line in its environmental report (see SAS, 2001). In 2001, SAS made the transition of combining its environmental and

This quote from the former CEO of SAS encompasses several elements thatweremost frequently cited asmotivations and catalystsfor SAS's environmental commitment: the Scandinavian culture, the winwin situation of eco-efciencies and the importance of

valuebecauSAS's e

4.3.2.Soc

diversSpecito notrecent

384 J.K. Lynes, M. Andrachuk / Journal of International Management 14 (2008) 377390written information about SAS's social responsibility does not equate, however, to a lack of action on the part of the airline.Managers within SAS admit that while environmental indicators are available for all operations, social indicators are lacking to adegree (SAS, 2005: 100). The motivations for social responsibility at SAS are strong but they are so embedded in the wayScandinavians do business that it is difcult to draw them out, as described by a senior manager at SAS:

If you discuss [social responsibility] with our CEO he can absolutely say that Scandinavian companies are moving to atriple-bottom line view of how they do business. You have to do this in order to have a sustainable economy, that's themain thing to survive and even have anything in the future. But Scandinavian countries, and perhaps Scandinaviancompanies, have been a little slow inwhat we call ethics, or morals and society with respect to [Global Reporting Initiative]guidelines and so on because we take it for granted like child labour, the rights to have unions. SAS has more than fortyunions. It is a part of the Scandinavian way it's just part of daily life. We know that we are in a global business. Forexample, we are ying to New Delhi in India what do they know of Scandinavian culture? Slowly, we are changing into aglobal way of looking at it.

Being a good corporate citizen is a strong driver at SAS with respect to social responsibility however, the effort to promote thisimage is not as strong as with environmental issues. Another interesting nding in relation to social responsibility at SAS is that, upuntil quite recently, SAS was focusing most of its efforts on internal social responsibility (e.g. employee equity) and not so much onsocial responsibility as it pertains external relations (e.g. humanitarianism). As withmany large corporations, airlines are becomingincreasingly globalized. This not only refers to increased destinations as a result of deregulation in the industry, but also to theairline industry's need to maximize efciencies as a result of the economic downturn in the industry that started in 2001. SAS hasbeen moving operations, such as ticketing agents, to foreign countries like India. As a result, the need for SAS to demonstrate bothsocial and environmental responsibility is taking on increased importance; motivations for this are predominantly image-based. Asenior manager at SAS reported:

It's fair to say that we have increasingly felt demand from the international community with respect to sustainabilityreportingwhen you look at the demands of the Global Reporting Initiatives and Global Compact, Scandinavian values arereected taken for granted. Now it is necessary to report them.

External stakeholders who may not be familiar with the importance Scandinavians place on social and environmentalresponsibility seek afrmation that the company is addressing these issues. Overall, however, evidence from the interviewsshowed that motivations for social responsibility were far less than for environmental responsibility in terms of external pressures

3 For a more in-depth discussion of these motivations see Lynes and Dredge (2006).so cited as an important motivating factor.

Social responsibilityial responsibility is dened by SAS as internal responsibility to employees with respect to working conditions, equality andity as well as external responsibility to humanity. In other words: relations with employees, and relations with communities.c motivations for SAS's social responsibility aremuchmore ambiguous than its environmental responsibility. It is interestinge that while SAS has been providing detailed reports of its environmental commitment for over a decade, the airline onlyly began specically addressing social responsibility in its corporate policies and annual reporting mechanisms. This lack ofScandinavia on the perceived environmental and overall image of SAS. Results of this research seem to indicate that, for SAS, itsoverall image has been improving based on recent improvements in the environmental image of the airline (SAS, 2000, 2001, 2002,2003). To date, it does not have an equivalent index for its image with respect to social responsibility.

Evidence from the interviews revealed that, for SAS, ve main motivations were identied with respect to environmentalcommitment at SAS which closely mirror those asserted in Fig. 1 (Section 2.1): 1) nancial benets (immediate or medium-term eco-efciencies as well as long-term nancial benets (competitive advantage, better investor relations); 2) the regulatory environment(e.g. anticipating future legislation); 3) being a good corporate citizen (from a Scandinavian perspective); 4) image/branding (positiveimage with suppliers; credibility with regulatory bodies; and, 5) pressures from industry stakeholders (e.g. corporate customers arerequiring increased transparency and accountability)3. In particular, the winwin nancialenvironmental benets of environmentalresponsibility were emphasized in numerous interviews of SAS management and employees. Improving SAS's environmental imagewas als British Airways were reacting to environmental pressures and big (corporate) customers were demanding it. What is theof a brand? comments the Environmental Director in a preliminary interview. Howdo you quantify the increase in businessse of a positive environmental image? He further reasoned that if the overall image of the company is improved because ofnvironmental image, then the cost of keeping that department is justied. SAS does annual market research on residents ofimage.In 1995, Stenberg appointed SAS's rst Environmental Director, who, since that time, has been an inuential player in the role

that environmental management has taken in decision-making within SAS. The Environmental Director was able to justify theexpense of developing environmental initiatives such as reportingmechanisms by arguing to upper management that competitorssuch a

on theimplemchalle

FurmentiomentiothrougIn factmentioenviroresult

in ScaEngine

385J.K. Lynes, M. Andrachuk / Journal of International Management 14 (2008) 377390I honestly think that it's awish ofmany people thatwe should be good.We should not pollute theworldmore thanwe [do]that's my driver. If I could contribute to reduce pollution of Sweden or Denmark or Norway, that would be really good... ingeneral in Scandinavia I think people are very aware of environmental issues. Like if you go to Greece or Italy, you know, oncamping sites, you see litter all over the place. You never see that in Sweden. People really care.s the environment. Another inuential factor she felt was the Swedish allemenstratt, or freedom to land, that is felt stronglyndinavian culture. This was reinforced through discussions with several employees at SAS including a Materials Processer who felt that Scandinavians respect the environment:Certain aspects of social responsibility are so engrained into Scandinavian culture that the mention of them seems redundant.However, given the current movement towards increased transparency in the reporting of nancial, social, and environmentalresponsibility, SAS is now putting a concentrated effort in making the S as prominent as the E in their CSER reporting mechanisms.

If we revisit the four systems of inuence that were discussed in Section 4.1, relationships between various inuences becomeapparent. In terms of SAS's environmental commitment, the connection between the social and political systems (i.e. legitimation/being a good corporate citizen), the science andmarket systems (i.e. nancial cost/benets), themarket and social systems (image) aswell the political and science systems (i.e. pressure from industry stakeholders; the regulatory structure) play an important role inSAS's motivations for environmental commitment. With respect to SAS's social commitment, the relationships between the foursystems are somewhat narrower in scope. Financialmotivations, such as eco-efciencies, were not prominent in the citedmotivationsfor social commitment, and neither was the relationship between the science and market systems. Instead, there were very strongrelationships between social and market systems (i.e. image) and between social and political systems (i.e. legitimation/being a goodcorporate citizen).

4.4. Catalysts: interpretations of the motivations

The model presented in Fig. 1 identies ways in which a rm interprets social and environmental motivations. The notion ofculture having a large impact on a rm's commitment to CSER was found to be an important part of the SAS case study. Whileculture played an important role in the development of both social and environmental responsibility at SAS, other catalysts such asinternal leadership and nancial position were only cited with respect to environmental responsibility.

4.4.1. CultureIn almost every interview, frontline employees and senior executives alike strongly expressed the importance of the

Scandinavian spirit of the people as an important part of why SAS is both environmentally and socially responsible.

I think the society of the Scandinavian countries even if we believe it not to be true is that we are simple, honestpeople. And from time to time we could be perceived a little bit naive in the international interaction, I don't know. But theupside of it is that we do things like that because we like to be that way and I think that's a driving force that's denitelybeing stimulated by corporate policies. The Scandinavian culture, the spirit if you like I think we would be hated [by theScandinavian people], they wouldn't fancy having a company like SAS behaving badly And the airline is always a verypublic type of business, everybody has a view on it, everybody has tried it and everybody is a customer as well. So it isprobably from that perspective, it is even more important compared to other types of business (Member of SAS Groupmanagement team).

The Head of Environmental Affairs at Luftfartsverket (The Swedish Civil Aviation Administration) believes that the Stockholm1972 United Nations Conference on the Human Environment had a profound effect on the development of the Scandinavian spirittowardosing the best option for the environmental responsibility of the airline.thermore, it is useful to identify not only what motivations for social responsibility were cited, but also those that were notned in the interviews or in the documents that were analyzed. For example, nancial efciencies that are so prominentlyned with respect to environmental commitment do not come into play in social responsibility. In this regard, nancial gainsh social responsibility are less tangible, such as employee productivity and a long-term strategic benet of having a good image.most social responsibility initiatives involve an investment towhich the direct payback is negligible. Furthermore, therewas non at SAS of one particular person who was considered the social champion. While the relationship is often made betweennmental champions identifying, packaging and selling (Andersson andBateman, 2000) green ideas as a business idea thatwillin nancial efciencies, the relationship between social responsibility and nancial incentives tends to be less tangible.I'm sorry to say that we have evidence that we haven't got the right environmental decisions becausewe couldn't convince theunions to change the concept the interaction between the company and the unions is very complicated. It's not only money,it's power, it's used as a tool to gain some other benets or to protect something that you have previously been given.

All service changes must be negotiated with the unions, which are very strict on what tasks cabin crew can carry out during aight (Manager, Corporate Purchasing, SAS; Flight Attendant, SAS). Internal regulatory pressures can sometimes act as a deterrentin chocompany. Interestingly, relationships with unions a strong S factor in CSER for SAS were found to inhibit theentation of some environmental initiatives. For instance, the Environmental Director of SAS indicated that unions were a

nge to changes in inight waste management.

4.4.2.Wi

commCEO omanagemissiactualall SAS

4.5. Le

ThThis c

386 J.K. Lynes, M. Andrachuk / Journal of International Management 14 (2008) 377390reporting and external validation of its actions as well as some form of measurement for improvement (e.g. internal indicators). Inother words, what type of action results from the motivations to be socially and environmentally responsible? In the case of SAS,the airline's level of commitment can be seen in Table 3, which provides a summary of SAS's main CSER activities.

With respect to SAS's environmental responsibility, the airline has implemented a variety of environmental initiatives over thepast decade, ranging from inight recycling programs to the purchase of aircraft with low engine emissions. SAS's environmentalcommitment can be demonstrated through such initiatives as detailed audited annual reporting (responsibility for action), year-vel of commitment towards CSER at SAS

e effect of the interaction of inuences, motivations and catalysts leads a rm towards a given level of commitment to CSER.ommitment can be seen through pledges to take action (e.g. corporate policies), the action itself (e.g. tools and personnel), Our former CEO, Jan Stenberg, he was very dedicated to environmental issues he was that as a person and thereforein 1995 he established environmental management at the very top level of SAS. And that same year, or the year after, [theEnvironmental Director] was appointed and environmental matters became a strategic issue for SAS. And that was drivenby Jan Stenberg. So, that is very important, I think and it is connected to what we started talking about, that you have tohave a kind of ght all the time between the environment department and the nancial competition and marketingbecause it's about where to place the resources and what is important and [Stenberg] thought that it was very important(Environmental Advisor 1).

The Vice-President, Procurement who has worked at SAS since 1990 also spoke of Stenberg as the foundation for SAS'senvironmental strategies:

I believe SAS's environmental agenda was driven, or at least heavily supported by our previous CEO Mr. Stenberg.because he was aware of the importance of this. He did very much and he implemented quality measures and criteria forthat. I would say he was the driving force behind that.

Collectively, the three environmental champions who, as senior managers, had decision-making power within the airline, wentabove and beyond in terms of encouraging environmental commitment at SAS.

The inuence that catalysts such as cultural, internal leadership and nancial position of a rm have are quite company-, country-and sector specic but play an important role in CSER. Table 2 provides an overview of the motivation and catalysts for social andenvironmental responsibility frequently cited in the literature and compares this list with the ndings in the SAS case study.l interviewees (internal and external to SAS), in terms of how these environmental champions moved environmentalitment to a strategic level at SAS and helped push environmental impacts to the forefront of decision-making. The formerf SAS was so supportive of long-term environmental management that in 1995 he actually overrode his fellow executiveement group by approving the purchase of a new eet of aircraft with engines that produced signicantly less NOxons, but which also added approximately US $40 million to the total cost of the eet (the rest of the executive team hadly voted against this decision). The strength of the former CEO's internal environmental leadership wasmentioned by almostmanagement and employees who were interviewed:in environmental responsibility: the Director, Aircraft and Engine Analysis, the Environmental Director (and now SustainabilityDirector), and the former CEO of SAS (between 1994 and 2001). Their roles as environmental champions pushed the airline toconsider environmental issues in ways that went beyond SAS's corporate environmental policy. Evidence of this was presented byseveraInternal leadership within SASth respect to internal leadership, therewas strong consensus during the interviews that three people in SAS played a key roleWith respect to social responsibility, a visit to SAS headquarters reveals that health and safety, good working conditions andequality are all strongly engrained in the company and the culture of SAS. The ofce of the Deputy CEO of SAS, for example, is notmuch different than that of a middle manager. Ofces are equipped with the latest in ergonomic designs for all employees and oneyear paid maternity leaves are also the norm. Unions are strongly entrenched into the ethos of the company. This is all evidencethat the social well-being of employees is an important part of SAS's culture of social and environmental responsibility.

In Sweden there has been a lot of debating and a lot of pro-environmental activitiesWhat's driven in the general debatehas driven a socio-trend towards the opportunity to work on the environment. Sweden is traditionally a country which hasa lot of countryside. I think it is a natural feeling to take care of your surroundings and your environment. I think its part ofthe culture, and that's one of the key drivers. I think the Scandinavian culture or the Swedish culture then also drives thatwe walk the talk and we would like to be the good guys (Vice-president, Inight Services).

The Executive Director of the European-based Air Transport Action Group believes that it is not just about realities, it's about theperception. SAS will be a big promoter of the environment because of the Scandinavian culture. Culture plays a strong role inshaping SAS's reaction to the environmental challenges that it faces within the airline industry andmobilizesmotivations for beingboth socially and environmentally responsible. Culturally, Scandinavian companies (including SAS), have a well-documentedhistory of being forward-thinking with respect to both environmental and social initiatives and commitment (e.g. Fineman, 1997).

over-year evaluation of its environmental improvements through a performance index (dedication to improvement) andenvironmentally-sensitive procurement policies (pledges to take a course of action). SAS's commitment to social responsibility isseen, for example, through its strong health and safety policies (pledges to take a course of action) and numerous unions afliatedwith the airline (action undertaken). Table 3 reinforces that while SAS is strong in all four components of environmentalresponsibility, its commitment appears not as strong in terms of social responsibility. For instance, SAS currently has no annualperformance index to measure improvements in social responsibility. This is not a reection of SAS's lack of initiative in this area,but rather a lack of a formalized measurement for continuous improvement. Changing market conditions for the airline, however,have created newmotivations for SAS to promote its socially responsible image to people beyond Scandinavia. This is one exampleof the link between the four systems of inuence and how a rm translates motivations into action.

Table 2A summary of frequently cited motivations for corporate social and environmental responsibility

Social Environmental

MotivationsLong-term nancial strategy Eco-efciencies (short-term nancial savings) Competitive advantage Good corporate citizenship Image Delay or avoid regulatory action Stakeholder pressure

CatalystsInternal leadership Culture Financial position

Table 3An overview of SAS's commitment towards social and environmental responsibility

Commitment a Environmental Social Both environmental and social

Pledges to take a course Corporate environment policy obligating Diversity policy (introduced in 2003). SAS's general terms and conditions for

387J.K. Lynes, M. Andrachuk / Journal of International Management 14 (2008) 377390of action: corporate policy all managers to conduct an environmentalassessment as part of theirdecision-making documentation.

procurement of goods includes socialand environment elements to whichsuppliers must conform.

SAS requires that suppliers ll out aquestionnaire on their environmentalbehaviour as well as an environmentaldeclaration.

Good health and safety programs foremployees (ergonomic furniture,low rate of occupational injuries).

Action undertaken: toolsand personnel

An emissions calculator that providesdestination and aircraft-speciccalculations of CO2 generated perpassenger per ight.

Annual survey of how employeesperceive their work situation(PULS survey).

Member of Global Compact since 2003.

Annual external survey of SAS's external Not known how many employees

environmental image (compared withoverall image of the company).

have direct duties related to socialresponsibility.

Between 24 full-time personnel since1995 plus representatives from variousdepartments.

250 unions afliated with SAS Group. 2 full-time personnel now responsiblefor sustainability. b

Responsibility for action:reporting and externalvalidation

Annual third-party veried environmentalreporting since 1995.

Reporting has been part of thesustainability report since 2003(before that it was part of the annualreport under human resources).

Annual third-party veried sustainabilityreporting since 2003.

Since the mid-1990s, SAS's environmentalreports have received numerous awards inboth Scandinavia and Europe.

Follows Deloitte's checklist for preparingand evaluating information aboutenvironment, ethics, social responsibilityand corporate governance.Where relevant follows the GlobalReporting Initiative (GRI) guidelinesInvestment by Robur's Nordic environmentaland ethical investment funds.

Dedication to improvement:internal performanceindicators

SAS has an environmental index thatmeasures their performance on anannual basis.

None None

a Based on the denition of commitment provided in Section 2.1b The two full-time sustainability personnel were formerly the Environmental Director and Environmental Co-ordinator (their positions have now been

expanded to include management of the social aspects of sustainability).

388 J.K. Lynes, M. Andrachuk / Journal of International Management 14 (2008) 3773905. Conclusions

The aim of this study was to rstly, develop a model that illustrated how inuences are interpreted and then shaped by arm into its commitment towards CSER and, secondly, to then apply this model using a case study of one rm. The conceptualmodel presented in Fig. 1 contributes to the existing literature by unpacking the layers of inuences that affect SAS'smotivations for both social and environmental responsibility and framing these in a way that allows deeper insight intounderstanding the relationships between them. Application of this model to other rms, both within the airline industry andbeyond, would allow for comparison between rms within the same sector as well as cross-sectorally. In this regard, the casestudy of SAS provides further evidence that motivations cannot be looked at in isolation of sectoral and cultural contexts. Theinformation obtained from the model-case study approach helps to explain and understand differences in levels ofcommitment towards CSER and as well as differences in the way rms manage social and environmental responsibility.

Secondly, the SAS case study demonstrated the degree to which catalysts the lens through which a company sees andinterprets motivations can have an important impact its level of commitment to CSER. The ndings highlight the importanceof culture in determining social and environmental motivations at SAS. It was found that the social democratic ideology of theScandinavian people has a profound inuence on the level of SAS's social and environmental commitment. The ScandinavianSpirit of social and environmental responsibility is embedded in the day-to-day operation of SAS. This pressure could bedescribed as being subtle, but consistent, such as the habit of putting on your seatbelt when you get into a car. It could beargued that if the variable of Scandinavian Spirit exists as we say it does, then all Scandinavian companies would be equallyinuenced by this factor. While this holds true to a certain extent with regards to social commitment, the case study of SASdemonstrated that other catalysts such as internal leadership also have a profound effect on shaping motivations into action.The effect that environmental champions have on the interpretation of the inuences dened in the model help to takeenvironmental responsibility at SAS to a higher level. The combination of strong cultural and internal leadership catalysts atSAS is what sets it apart from other airlines operating under similar sectoral and external inuences.

Thirdly, the case study of SAS both illustrated and reinforced ndings in the literature that there are differences betweenmotivations for social and environmental responsibility. By looking at social and environmental responsibility together as oneentity, we run the risk of forgetting about the distinctiveness of each. In the case of SAS, between 2003 and 2006, managementhas moved towards creating a sustainability plan that, in many ways, combines the S and the E together such as changing thetitle of the previous Environmental Director of SAS to be Sustainability Director and integrating the Environmental Report intoa Financial and Sustainability Report. The result appears to be a broader interpretation of sustainability at the managementlevel, with the action being taken at the operational level being less detailed. While the trend towards branding sustainabilitymight satisfy increasing demands on reporting requirements, it does not bode well for the actual level of commitment of a rm,such as SAS, towards CSER, as dened by the model.

5.1. Future directions of research

Firstly, while previous studies have explored the relationship between CSER and culture (e.g. Branzei et al., 2001; Egri et al.,2004) the empirical research in this area remains limited and requires further investigative research. The issue of culture becomesparticularly important when looking at rms, such as airlines, which operate in a cross-national setting where the values of theirhome country may differ from other cultures in which they operate. For example, because of differing fundamental assumptionswithin other cultures of what being socially responsible is, as SAS expands its operations abroad, it is having to adjust its socialreporting mechanisms to better reect the airline's commitment towards social responsibility.

The evidence provided in this case study of SAS now needs to be complemented by further research that examines andcompares the relationships between CSER and culture. The important role that culture plays is particularly relevant to 1)comparing motivations for companies in different countries but in the same industry and 2) examining motivations for rms thatoperate cross-nationally. For example how are cultural norms transferred (if at all) to corporate branches which operate undervarying national norms and values? Volvo is one example of a company which built human-centered assembly lines in NorthAmerica that went against the grain of the U.S. auto industry (Resetar et al., 1998).

Secondly, this paper presented a conceptual model of inuences, motivations and catalysts for CSER (Fig. 1) that could be usedas a base fromwhich to build upon in future studies that complement or compare the existing ndings. Understanding inuenceson decision-making can determine the mechanisms needed to ensure continuous improvement of CSER.

A fundamental tenet of this paper is that indicators must acknowledge the cultural motivations and values of business ifthey are to be deemed relevant by industry. Support for this argument comes from critics who argue that management of socialand environmental issues is a cultural construct that requires solid understanding of the complex interactions between thenatural and social sciences. Indicators that do not take into account the range of circumstances that inuence corporatecommitment towards both social and environmental responsibility the risk of failure.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Sustainable Tourism Cooperative Research Centre (Australia), Grifth University and theUniversity of Waterloo, for providing funding for this research. Special thanks goes to the participants in the case study of SAS and,in particular, to the Sustainability Director of SAS, Niels Eirik Nertun.

389J.K. Lynes, M. Andrachuk / Journal of International Management 14 (2008) 377390References

Anderson, C.L., Bieniaszewska, R.L., 2005. The role of corporate social responsibility in an oil company's expansion into new territories. Corporate SocialResponsibility and Environmental Management 12, 19.

Andersson, L.M., Bateman, T.S., 2000. Individual environmental initiative: championing natural environmental issues in U.S. business organizations. Academy ofManagement Journal 43 (4), 548570.

Annandale, D., Taplin, R., 2003. The determinants of mining company response to environmental approvals regulation: a report of Australian research. Journal ofEnvironmental Planning and Management 46 (6), 887909.

Bakan, J., 2004. The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Prot and Power. Viking Canada, Toronto.Bansal, P., Roth, K., 2000. Why companies go green: a model of ecological responsiveness. Academy of Management Journal 43 (4), 717747.Bendell, J., Bendell, M., Kearins, K., Ives, K., Visser, W., 2005. 2004 Lifeworth Annual Review of Corporate Responsibility. http://www.lifeworth.net. (Accessed

January 2006).Bichta, C., 2003. Corporate socially responsible (CSR) practices in the context of Greek industry. Corporate Social Responsibility and EnvironmentalManagement 10,

1224.Branzei, O., Vertinsky, I., Takahashi, T., Zhang, W., 2001. Corporate environmentalism across cultures: a comparative eld study of Chinese and Japanese executives.

International Journal of Cross-Cultural Management 1 (3), 287312.Bull, B., 2003. Corporate social responsibility: the Norwegian experience. Paper prepared for the Initiative on Ethics and Development, the Inter-American

Development Bank. www.iadb.org/etica/ingles/index-i.cfm. (Accessed 14 January 2006).Cspedes-Lorente, J., Burgos-Jimnez, J., de lvarez-Gil, M.J., 2003. Stakeholders' environmental inuence: an empirical analysis in the Spanish hotel industry.

Scandinavian Journal of Management 19 (3), 333358.Childs, M.W., 1936. Sweden: The Middle Way. Yale University Press, New Haven.Patterns of airline development. In: Clancy, M. (Ed.), Exporting Paradise: Tourism and Development in Mexico. Pergamon, Amsterdam, pp. 93111.Edstrm, A., 1991. Scandinavian Airlines Systems (SAS): strategic reorientation and social change. In: Maccoby, M. (Ed.), Sweden at the Edge: Lessons for American

and Swedish Managers. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.Egri, C.P., Ralston, D.A., Milton, L., Naoumova, I., Palmer, I., Ramburuth, P., Wangenheim, F., Fu, P., Kuo, M.H., Ansari, M., Carranza, M.T.G., Riddle, L., Girson, I., Elenkov,

D., Dabic, M., Butt, A., Srinivasan, N., Potocan, V.V., Furrer, O., Hallinger, P., Dalgic, T., Thanh, H.V., Richards, M., Rossi, A.M., 2004. Managerial perspectives oncorporate environmental and social responsibilities in 22 countries. Academy of Management Best Conference Paper 2004, pp. C1C6.

European Commission, 1999. Air Transport and the Environment: Towards Meeting the Challenges of Sustainable Development. Brussels (COM/99/0640 nal).European Commission, 2002. Corporate social responsibility: a business contribution to sustainable development. Directorate for Employment and Social Affairs,

Unit D.1.Fig, D., 2005. Manufacturing amnesia: corporate social responsibility in South Africa. International Affairs 81 (3), 599617.Fineman, S., 1997. Constructing the green manager. British Academy of Management 8, 3138.Fischer, K., Schot, J. (Eds.), 1993. Environmental Strategies for Industry: International Perspectives on Research Needs and Policy Implications. Island Press,Washington.Garsten, C., 2003. The cosmopolitan organization an essay on corporate accountability. Global Networks 3 (3), 355370.Gibson, R.B. (Ed.), 1999. Voluntary Initiatives: The New Politics of Corporate Greening, Broadview, Toronto.Gilley, K., Worrell, D., El-Jelly, A., 2000. Corporate environmental initiatives and anticipated rm performance: the differential effects of process-driven versus

product-driven greening initiatives. Journal of Management 26 (6), 11991216.Graff Zivin, J., Small, A., 2005. A ModiglianiMiller theory of altruistic corporate social responsibility. Topics in Economic Analysis and Policy 5 (1) Article 10.Hart, S., 1995. A natural-resource-based view of the rm. Academy of Management Review 20, 9861014.Henriques, I., Sadorsky, P., 1996. The determinants of an environmentally responsive rm: an empirical approach. Journal of Environmental Economics and

Management 30 (3), 381395.Hofstede, G., 1984. Culture's Consequences: International differences in work-related values. Sage Publications, Newbury Park.Keogh, P.D., Polonsky, M.J., 1998. Environmental commitment: a basis for environmental entrepreneurship? Journal of Organizational Change 11 (1), 3849.Khanna, M., Anton, W., 2002. What is driving corporate environmentalism: opportunity or threat? Corporate Environmental Strategy 9 (4), 409417.Kiernan, M., 2001. Eco-value, sustainability, and shareholder value: driving environmental performance to the bottom line. Environmental Quality Management

112 Summer.Kirk, D., 1998. Attitudes to environmental management held by a group of hotel managers in Edinburgh. Hospitality Management 17, 3347.Lund-Thomsen, P., 2004. Towards a critical framework on corporate social and environmental responsibility in the south: the case of Pakistan. Development 47 (3),

106113.Lynes, J., 1999. Minimizing Inight Waste in the Airline Industry. Unpublished Masters thesis, University of Waterloo.Lynes, J., 2003. Getting the goods out of industry: using interactive discussion tools as a form of strategic questioning when conducting in-depth interviews.

Proceedings of CAUTHE Conference, Coffs Harbour, 58 February 2003.Lynes, J., Dredge, D., 2006. Going green: commitment to environmental management in the airline industry. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 14 (2), 116138.Lyon, D., 2004. How can you help organizations change to meet the corporate responsibility agenda? Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental

Management 11, 133139.Maccoby, M. (Ed.), 1991. Sweden at the Edge: Lessons for American and Swedish Managers. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.McIntosh, M., 2003. Raising a Ladder to the Moon: The Complexities of Corporate Social and Environmental Responsibility. Palgrave Macmillan, New York.Middleton, V., Hawkins, R., 1999. Sustainable tourism: A Marketing Perspective. Butterworth Heinemann, Boston.Oketch, M.O., 2004. The corporate stake in social cohesion. Corporate Governance 4 (3), 519.Summary for policy-makers: aviation and the global atmosphere. In: Penner, J., Lister, D., Griggs, D., Dokken, D., McFarland, M. (Eds.), A Special Report of IPCC

Working Groups I and III in collaboration with the Scientic Assessment Panel to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer,Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). University Press, Cambridge.

Pilling, M., 2004. Brand extensions. Airline Business 20 (3), 4648.Prakash, A., 2000. Greening the Firm: The Politics of Corporate Environmentalism. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Resetar, S., Camm, F., Drezner, J., 1998. Environmental Management in Design: Lessons fromVolvo and Hewlitt-Packard for the Department of Defense. RAND, Santa

Monica, CA.Renn, O., 2001. The role of social science in environmental policy-making. Science and Public Policy 28 (6), 427437.Rondinelli, D.A., Berry, M.A., 2000. Environmental citizenship in multinational corporations: corporate responsibility and sustainable development. European

Management Journal 18 (1), 7084.Rosenberg, W., 2004. Making a prot and a difference: HP invents an organization to drive sustainability. Journal of Organizational Excellence Summer.SAS (Scandinavian Airlines), 1996. Environmental Report 1995. SAS, AB, Stockholm.SAS (Scandinavian Airlines), 2000. Environmental Report 1999. SAS AB, Stockholm.SAS (Scandinavian Airlines), 2001. Environmental Report 2000. SAS AB, Stockholm.SAS (Scandinavian Airlines), 2002. The SAS Group Annual Report 2001 & Summary of Environmental Report. The SAS Group, Stockholm.SAS (Scandinavian Airlines), 2003. SAS Group Financial/Sustainability Report 2002. SAS Group, Stockholm.SAS (Scandinavian Airlines), 2005. SAS Group's Annual and Sustainability Report, 2004. SAS Group, Stockholm.Schaefer, A., 2004. Corporate sustainability integrating environmental and social concerns? Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 11,

179187.Schramm-Nielsen, J., Lawrence, P., Sivesind, K.H., 2004. Management in Scandinavia: Culture, Context and Change. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK.

Sharma, S., 2000. Managerial interpretations and organizational context as predictors of corporate choice of environmental strategy. Academy of ManagementJournal 43 (4), 681697.

Tilton, T., 1990. The Political Theory of Swedish Social Democracy. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Tingsten, H., 1973. The Swedish Social Democrats: Their ideological development. Translated by Frankel, G. and Howard-Rosen, P., Bedminster Press, Totowa, NJ.Tschopp, D.J., 2005. Corporate social responsibility: a comparison between the United States and the European Union. Corporate Social Responsibility and

Environmental Management 12, 5559.Tullberg, J., 2005. Reections upon the responsive approach to corporate social responsibility. Business Ethics: A European Review 14 (3), 261276.Welford, R., Starkey, R. (Eds.), 1996. Business and the Environment. Earthscan Publications, London.Winn, M., Angell, L., 2000. Towards a process model of corporate greening. Organization Studies 21 (6), 11191148.Zeffane, R.M., Polonsky, M.J., Medley, P., 1995. Corporate environmental commitment: developing the operational concept. Business Strategy and the Environment 3

(Winter Issue), 1733.

390 J.K. Lynes, M. Andrachuk / Journal of International Management 14 (2008) 377390

Motivations for corporate social and environmental responsibility: A case study of Scandinavian.....IntroductionDefining CSER: various interpretations of one common goalDeveloping a model of motivations for corporate social and environmental responsibility at the .....Part I: the four systems of influencePart II: motivationsPart III: catalystsLevel of commitment

Research approachResults and discussionThe four systems of influences with respect to the airline industry and ScandinaviaMarket systemsPolitical/institutional systemScience systemSocial system

Background of SASMotivations at SASEnvironmental responsibilitySocial responsibility

Catalysts: interpretations of the motivationsCultureInternal leadership within SAS

Level of commitment towards CSER at SAS

ConclusionsFuture directions of research

AcknowledgementsReferences