Moskva, Moscow, Russian Federation
UDK 331.1 Теория и организация труда. Взаимоотношения между предприятием и персоналом, между работодателями и работающими, между трудом и капиталом
The article is devoted to the study of corporate culture as a factor in the sustainable development of an organization, which can both contribute to and hinder the achievement of goals and the implementation of sustainable development principles in corporate practice. The main features of the corporate culture of sustainable development are presented, determining the directions of transformation of existing cultures, as well as the characteristics of the manifestations of strong and weak cultures of sustainable development and their impact on the development of the organization. A model of the organizational culture of sustainable development is proposed and, based on the generalization of existing experience, corporate practices are identified that contribute to its formation and development, including ensuring the involvement of employees in solving existing problems. The strengths of various types of corporate culture are highlighted, which must be aligned with the goals of sustainable development in the corporate strategy. Additional opportunities for transforming corporate culture to achieve sustainable development goals when implementing technology based on artificial intelligence are shown.
sustainable development, corporate culture of sustainable development, employee engagement, artificial intelligence
1. Konovalova V.G. Innovacionnaya korporativnaya kul'tura: osobennosti proyavleniya i usloviya razvitiya [Tekst] / V.G. Konovalova // Kadrovik. — 2015. — № 5–6. — S. 95–105.
2. Konovalova V.G. Avtonomiya na rabochem meste vs mikromenedzhmenta: preimuschestva i problemy [Tekst] / V.G. Konovalova // Sbornik statey XVII kadrovogo foruma Chernozem'ya. — Voronezh: Izd-vo Voronezhskogo gos. un-ta, 2024. — S. 14–18.
3. Shul'zhenko I.S. Ambassadory korporativnyh cennostey kak instrument upravleniya vovlechennost'yu personala [Tekst] / I.S. Shul'zhenko, A.S. Lobacheva // UPIRR. 2023. — № 3. — S. 98–102.
4. Aung P.N., Hallinger P. The intellectual structure of the literature on sustainability leadership in higher education: an author co-citation analysis. Int. J. Educ. Manag., 2022, 36 (5), pp. 784–799. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-09-2021-0371
5. Avery G.C., Bergsteiner H. Sustainable Leadership: Honeybee and Locust Approaches; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2011.
6. Baumgartner R.J. Organizational culture and leadership: preconditions for the development of sustainable corporation. Sustain. Dev., 17 (2) (2009), pp. 102–113. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.405
7. Chatman J.A., Choi A. Measuring organizational culture: converging on definitions and approaches to advance the paradigm. Handbook of Research Methods for Organisational Culture, Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd (2022), pp. 92–107. URL: https://www. scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85129577473&partne rID=40&md5=3e772735ddb1c53c914ffd8b9ebe62d7
8. Deloitte. 2023 Millennial and Gen Z Survey. URL: https:// www.deloitte.com/global/en.html
9. Gallup (2023). The Powerful Duo of Strengths and Engagement. URL: https://www.gallup.com/workplace/505523/ powerful-duo-strengths-engagement.aspx
10. Galpin T., Whitttington J.L., Bell G. (2015). Is your sustainability strategy sustainable? Creating a culture ofsustainability. Corporate Governance, vol. 15, iss. 1, pp. 1–17.
11. Gartner HR Survey Finds 84% of Employees Believe Their Organization Lacks a Strong Sustainability Culture. URL: https:// www.gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/202312-05-gartner-hr-survey-finds-84-percent-of-employees-believe-their-organization-lacks-a-strong-sustainability-culture
12. GSIA (2022). Global Sustainable Investment Review 2022. URL: https://www.gsi-alliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/GSIA-Report-2022.pdf
13. Hens L., Block C., Cabello-Eras J.J. et al. On the evolution of “Cleaner Production” as a concept and a practice J. Clean. Prod., 172 (2018), pp. 3323–3333. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.082
14. Isensee C., Teuteberg F. et. al. The relationship between organizational culture, sustainability, and digitalization in SMEs: a systematic review. J. Clean. Prod., 275 (2020). DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jclepro.2020.122944
15. Kantabutra S. Exploring relationships among sustainability organizational culture components at a leading Asian industrial conglomerate Sustainability, 13 (4) (2021), p. 1733. DOI:https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041733
16. Ketprapakorn N., Kantabutra S. Culture development for sustainable SMEs: Toward a behavioral theory. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2629.
17. Ketprapakorn N., Kantabutra S. Toward an organizational theory of sustainability culture. Sustain. Prod. Consum., 32 (2022), pp. 638–654. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2022.05.020
18. Kiesnere A.L., Baumgartner R.J. Sustainability management emergence and integration on different management levels in smaller large-sized companies in Austria. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2019, 26, 1–20.
19. Kitsios F., Kamariotou M., Talias M.A. Corporate sustainability strategies and decision support methods: a bibliometric analysis Sustainability, 12 (2) (2020), p. 521, DOI:https://doi.org/10.3390/su12020521
20. Konovalova V., Mitrofanova E., Mitrofanova A., Gevorgyan R. The impact of artificial intelligence on human resources management strategy: opportunities for the humanization and risks. Wisdom. 2022. T. 2. № 1. S. 88–96.
21. Lozano R. Are companies planning their organisational changes for corporate sustainability? An analysis of three case studies on resistance to change and their strategies to overcome it. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2013, 20, 275–295.
22. McKinsey & Company (2022). The ESG Premium: New Perspectives on Value and Performance. URL: https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/business%20functions/sustainability/our%20insights/the%20esg%20premium%20new%20 perspectives%20on%20value%20and%20performance/the-esgpremium-new-perspectives-on-value-and-performance.pdf
23. Paais M., Pattiruhu J.R. (2020) Effect of motivation, leadership, and organizational culture on satisfaction and employee performance The Journal of Asian Finance, Asian J. Finance, Econ. Bus., 7 (8) (2020), pp. 577–588. DOI:https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.no8.577
24. Pennington L.K., More E. Culture's roles in organizational sustainability. Acad. Manag. Proc., 2016 (1) (2016), Article 15415. DOI:https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2016.15415abstract
25. Rout M., Reid J., Wallace K.J. et. al. Voicing stakeholder visions for biodiversity indicators: a framework using content analysis. Environmental and Sustainability Indicators, 12 (2021), Article 100156. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.indic.2021.100156
26. Tseng M.-L., Wu K.-J., Ma L., Kuo T.C., Sai F. A hierarchical framework for assessing corporate sustainability performance using a hybrid fuzzy synthetic method-DEMATEL. Technolog. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2019, 144, 524–533.
27. Turner A. How does intrinsic and extrinsic motivation drive performance culture in organizations? Cogent Education, 4 (1) (2017), Article 1337543. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2017.1337543
28. World Economic Forum (2022). Why sustainability is crucial for corporate strategy | World Economic Forum. URL: https:// www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/06/why-sustainability-iscrucial-for-corporate-strategy/
29. Yadav K., Gupta N., Kumar A. Mechanistic understanding and holistic approach of phytoremediation: a review on application and future prospects. Ecol. Eng., 120 (2018), pp. 274–298.
