An SDG-based tool for corporate governance: managing sustainability pressures in the steel industry
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7433/s130.2026.09Keywords:
Paradox theory, Institutional complexity, Sustainability, Interventionist research, Steel industryAbstract
Frame of the research: Companies must manage multiple institutional pressures and promote sustainability through long-term initiatives.
Purpose of the paper: The paper aims to identify an SDG-based tool capable of managing sustainability pressures and supporting long-term strategic decision-making.
Methodology: This study employs a constructive research approach. It is a form of interventionist research aimed at constructing new management tools or solutions to address real-life organisational problems.
Results: The paper proposes, refines, and tests an SDG-based assessment tool in a large Italian steel company. The tool allows benchmark-based sustainability performance assessment and identifies opportunities for managerial innovation, guiding future decision-making and initiatives.
Research limitations: Despite the significant implications of the study, it presents limitations, particularly regarding the need for cross-sector validation and longitudinal assessment.
Practical implications: The tool supports corporate governance and top managers in making more informed and sustainable strategic decisions. Moreover, the study contributes to the discourse on the paradox perspective of sustainability by linking it to a strategic and systemic perspective.
Originality of the study: Inspired by the 17 SDGs, the study strategically and operationally frames sustainability pressures through paradox perspective, enabling consideration of the complexity and intrinsic value of social and environmental elements and their systemic nature.
References
ADAMS, R., JEANRENAUD, S., BESSANT, J., DENYER, D. OVERY, P. (2016), “Sustainability-oriented Innovation: A Systematic Review”, British Accademy of Management, vol.18, no.2, pp.180-205.
AGUILERA, R. V., ARAGÓN-CORREA, J. A., MARANO, V. TASHMAN, P. A. (2021), “The corporate governance of environmental sustainability: A review and proposal for more integrated research”, Journal of Management, vol.47 no.6, pp.1468-1497.
AGUILERA, R. V., JACKSON, G. (2010), « Comparative and international corporate governance”, The Academy of Management Annals, vol.4, pp.485-556.
ALBERTSEN, R. R. (2024), “Outcomes of Paradox Responses in Corporate Sustainability: A Qualitative Meta-Analysis”. Business & Society.
ANNESI, N., BATTAGLIA, M., GRAGNANI, P., IRALDO F. (2021), “Integrating the 2030 Agenda at the municipal level: Multilevel pressures and institutional shift”, Land Use Policy, vol.105, p.105424.
ASHWIN KUMAR, N. C., SMITH, C., BADIS, L., WANG, N., AMBROSY, P., TAVARES, R. (2016), “ESG factors and risk-adjusted performance: A new quantitative model”, Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, vol.6, no.4, pp.292-300.
BARNETT, M. L., CASHORE, B. W., HENRIQUES, I., HUSTED, B. W., RAJAT, P., PINSKE, J. (2021), “Reorient the business case for corporate sustainability”, Stanford Social Innovation Review.
BATTAGLIA, M., ANNESI, N., CALABRESE, M., FREY, M. (2020), “Do agenda 2030 and Sustainable Development Goals act at local and operational levels? Evidence from a case study in a large energy company in Italy”, Business Strategy and Development, vol.3, no.4, pp.603-614.
BOIRAL, O., HERAS-SAIZARBITORIA, I., BROTHERTON, M. C. (2018), “Corporate biodiversity management through certifiable standards”, Business Strategy and the Environment, vol.27, no.3, pp.389–402.
CAMPBELL, J. L. (2007), “Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility”, Academy of Management Review, vol.32, no.3, pp.946–967.
CARMINE, S., DE MARCHI, V. (2023), “Reviewing paradox theory in corporate sustainability toward a systems perspective”, Journal of Business Ethics, vol.184, no.1, pp.139-158.
CHALMERS, G.M.V. (2019), “The SDG Impact Assessment Tool-a free online tool for self-assessments of impacts on Agenda 2030”, Policy, vol.1, pp.150-167.
DIMAGGIO, P. J., POWELL, W. W. (1983), “The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields”, American sociological review, vol.48, no.2, pp.147-160.
ENDRIKAT, J., GUENTHER, E., HOPPE, H. (2014), “Making sense of conflicting empirical findings: a meta-analytic review of the relationship between corporate environmental and financial performance”, European Management Journal, vol.32, pp.735-751.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2023), “European Sustainability Reporting Principles Esrs”, Bruxelles.
GARCÍA-SÁNCHEZ, I. M., AMOR-ESTEBAN, V., GALINDO-ÁLVAREZ, D. (2020), “Communication strategies for the 2030 agenda commitments: A multivariate approach”, Sustainability, vol.12, no.24, p.10554.
GREENWOOD, R., RAYNARD, M., KODEIH, F., MICELOTTA, E.R., LOUNSBURY, M. (2011), “Institutional complexity and organizational responses”, Academy of Management annals, vol.5, no.1, pp.317-371.
GLOBAL REPORTING INITIATIVE (GRI) (2020). Linking the SDGs and the GRI Standards.
GOYAL, S., ESPOSITO, M., KAPOOR, A. (2018), “Circular economy business models in developing economies: lessons from India on reduce, recycle, and reuse paradigms”, Thunderbird International Business Review, vol.60, no.5, pp.729-740.
HAHN, T., FIGGE, F., PINKSE, J., PREUSS, L. (2010), “Editorial tradeofs in corporate sustainability: You can’t have your cake and eat it”, Business Strategy and the Environment, vol.19, no.4, pp.217–229.
HAHN, T., PINKSE, J., PREUSS, L., FIGGE, F. (2015), “Tensions in corporate sustainability: Towards an integrati-ve framework”, Journal of Business Ethics, vol.127, no.2, pp.297–316.
HAHN, T., FIGGE, F., PINKSE, J., PREUSS, L. (2018), “A paradox perspective on corporate sustainability: Descriptive, instrumental, and normative aspects”. Journal of Business Ethics, vol.148, no.2, pp.235–248.
Hoffman, A. J. (1999). Institutional evolution and change: Environmentalism and the U.S. chemical industry. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 351-371.
JÖNSSON, S., LUKKA, K. (2007), “There and back again: doing interventionist research in management accounting”, In: Handbooks of Management Accounting Research Vol. 1, Chapman C, Hopwood A and Shields MD (Eds.), pp.373-397, Elsevier, London.
KASANEN, E., LUKKA, K., SIITONEN, A. (1993), “The constructive approach in management accounting research”, Journal of Management Accounting Research, pp.43–64.
KHAN, M. (2019), “Corporate governance, ESG, and stock returns around the world”, Financial Analysts Journal, vol.75, no.4, pp.103-123.
KUMAR, D., PRATAP, B., AGGARWAL, A. (2019), “Affirmative Action in Government Jobs in India: Did the Job Reservation Policy Benefit Disadvantaged Groups?” Journal of Asian and African Studies, vol.55, no.1.
KURE, H. I., ISLAM, S., RAZZAQUE, M. A. (2018), “An integrated cyber security risk management approach for a cyber-physical system”, Applied Sciences, vol.8, no.6, p.898.
LABRO. E., TUOMELA, T. S. (2003), “On bringing more action in management accounting research: process consideration based on two constructive case studies”, European Accounting Review, vol.12, pp.409–42.
LEE, R., KIM J. (2021), “Developing a Social Index for Measuring the Public Opinion Regarding the Attainment of Sustainable Development Goals”, Social Indicators Research, vol.156, pp.201–221.
MAGNUSSON, M., MARTINI, A. (2008), “Dual organisational capabilities: from theory to practice–the next challenge for continuous innovation”, International Journal of Technology Management, vol.42, no.1-2, pp.1-19.
MORSE, J.M., BARRETT, M., MAYAN, M., OLSON, K., SPIERS, J. (2002), “Verification strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research”. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, vol.1, no.2, pp.13-22.
MOYER, J. D., BOHL, D. K. (2019), “Alternative pathways to human development: Assessing trade-offs and synergies in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals”, Futures, vol.105, pp.199-210.
NAIDU, M. B. (2020), “Corporate Sustainability: How can GRI guidelines and ISO standards complement each other and relate with the SDGs?”
NAWROCKA, D., PARKER, T. (2009), “Finding the connection: environmental management systems and environmental performance”, Journal of Cleaner Production, vol.17, no.6, pp.601-607.
SCHAD, J., BANSAL, P. (2018), “Seeing the forest and the trees: How a systems perspective informs paradox research”, Journal of Management Studies, vol.55, no.8, pp.1490–1506.
SCOTT, W. R. (2001), Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks. CA: Sage Publications.
SMITH, W. K., LEWIS, M. W. (2011), “Toward a theory of paradox: a dynamic equilibrium model of organizing”, Academy of Management Review, vol.36, no.2, pp.381-403.
UNITED NATIONS (UN), (2015), “The Sustainable Development Goals Report”.
URBIETA, L. (2024), “Firms' engagement with sustainable development goals (SDGs): A scoping review of empirical works”, Business Strategy & Development, vol.7, no.3, p.416.
VAN DER BYL, C.A., SLAWINSKI, N. (2015), “Embracing tensions in corporate sustainability: A review of research from win-wins and trade-offs to paradoxes and beyond”, Organization & Environment, vol.28, no.1, pp.54-79.
VILDÅSEN, S. S. (2018), “Corporate sustainability in practice: An exploratory study of the sustainable development goals (SDGs)”, Business Strategy & Development, vol.1, no.4, pp.256-264.
VINCENZI, T. B. D., KRUGLIANSKAS, I., SOUZA PIAO, R. (2025), “Sustainable Development Goals as Strategic Drivers: A Case Study in Brazil”, Business Strategy & Development, vol.8, no.1, p.70093.
YANG, Y., KONRAD, A. M. (2010), „Challenges for institutional theory”, Journal of Management Inquiry, vol.19, pp.14-20.
WADDOCK, S.A., BODWELL, C., GRAVES, S.B. (2002), “Responsibility: The new business imperative”, Academy of management perspectives, vol.16, no.2, 132-p.148.
WITTE, C., DILYARD, J. (2017), “Guest editors' introduction to the special issue: The contribution of multinational enterprises to the Sustainable Development Goals”, Transnational Corporations.
