Environmental NGOs and Business: A Grounded Theory of Assessment, Targeting, and Influencing

Business & Society

Volumn 42, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 267-276

  Hendry, Jamie R ^a  

^a BUCKNELL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

corporate environmental management; environmental organization; grounded theory; qualitative research; stakeholder theory

Indexed keywords

EID: 84992834584     PISSN: 00076503     EISSN: 15524205     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0007650303042002005     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Dey, I. (1998). Grounding grounded theory: Guidelines for qualitative inquiry. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
2. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational/fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147-160.
3. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
4. Frooman, J. (1999). Stakeholder influence strategies. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 191-205.
5. Glaser, B. G. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis: Emergence versus forcing. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
6. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine.
7. Harper, D. (1992). Small N's and community case studies. In C. C. Ragin & H. S. Becker (Eds.), What is a case? Exploring the foundations of social inquiry (pp. 139-158). New York: Cambridge University Press.
8. Hendry, J. R. (1999, August). Evaluating corporate social responsibility, responsiveness, and performance: A model using the stakeholder's perspective. Paper presented at the Academy of Management meetings, Chicago.
9. Jones, T. M. (1995). Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics. Academy of Management Review, 20, 404-437.
10. Lieberson, S. (1992). Small N's and big conclusions: An examination of the reasoning in comparative studies based on a small number of cases. In C. C. Ragin & H. S. Becker (Eds.), What is a case? Exploring the foundations of social inquiry (pp. 105-118). New York: Cambridge University Press.
11. Miles, M., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
12. Rowley, T., & Berman, S. (2000). A brand new brand of corporate social performance. Business & Society, 39(4), 397-418.
13. Stephens, C. U., & Bezold, M. P. (1998, June). Neo-institutional theory reconceptualized: A stakeholder perspective. Paper presented at the annual conference of the International Association for Business and Society (IABS), Kailua-Kona, HI.
14. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
15. Vaughn, D. (1992). Theory elaboration: The heuristics of case analysis. In C. C. Ragin & H. S. Becker (Eds.), What is a case? Exploring the foundations of social inquiry (pp. 173-202). New York: Cambridge University Press.
16. Walton, J. (1992). Making the theoretical case. In C. C. Ragin & H. S. Becker (Eds.), What is a case? Exploring the foundations of social inquiry (pp. 121-138). New York: Cambridge University Press.
17. Wokutch, R. (1982). Ethical investment policies and activities of catholic religious orders. Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy, 4, 157-188.
18. Yin, R. K. (1981). The case study crisis: Some answers. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 58-65.
19. Yin, R. K. (1984). Case study research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
20. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.