Achieving Shared Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Value Creation: Toward a Social Resource-Based View (SRBV) of the Firm

TLDR: In this article, the authors explored the social capabilities of social entrepreneurs and illustrative cases with the purpose of elaborating RBV toward a social resource-based view (SRBV) of the firm.

Abstract: While the economic and environmental dimensions of the triple bottom line (TBL) have been covered extensively by management theory and practice, the social dimension remains largely underrepresented. The resource-based view (RBV) of the firm and the natural resource-based view (NRBV) of the firm are revisited to lay the theoretical foundation for exploring how the social dimension might be addressed. Social capabilities are then explored by looking at the social entrepreneurship literature and illustrative cases with the purpose of elaborating RBV toward a social resource-based view (SRBV) of the firm. Three illustrative cases, which represent social businesses located in catastrophe-ridden Haiti, show how capabilities are used to overcome challenging constraints. The goal for the social entrepreneur is to employ the appropriate capabilities to ensure economic success, a positive environmental impact, and social benefits that leave the local community in a better position than without the business. Just as NRBV is a previous elaboration of RBV, so can SRBV be an elaborated theoretical foundation for future research. The components of a theory are systematically addressed by extending the range of variables (adding social capabilities), extending the domain (including stakeholders with economic, environmental, and/or social stakes), and offering propositions on variable relationships and outcome predictions (linking social capabilities and shared TBL value creation). By highlighting the social capabilities of social entrepreneurs, this research illuminates the micro-foundations of corporate social responsibility, emphasizing the value of individual level analyses.

Figures

TABLE 6 Overview on stakeholders’ inputs at the three social businesses

FIGURE 1 The RBV (adapted from Hart, 1995, p. 988)

TABLE 7 Shared TBL Value Objectives Across the Cases

TABLE 8 A Social Resource-based View: Conceptual Framework, own illustration

TABLE 9 Toward a more comprehensive overview of the variables

TABLE 4 Overview on capabilities leveraged in the cases

Full text

Achieving Shared Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Value Creation
Toward a Social Resource-based View (SRBV) of the Firm
Tate, Wendy; Bals, Lydia
Document Version
Accepted author manuscript
Published in:
Journal of Business Ethics
DOI:
10.1007/s10551-016-3344-y
Publication date:
2018
License
Unspecified
Citation for published version (APA):
Tate, W., & Bals, L. (2018). Achieving Shared Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Value Creation: Toward a Social
Resource-based View (SRBV) of the Firm. Journal of Business Ethics, 152(3), 803-826.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3344-y
Link to publication in CBS Research Portal
General rights
Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners
and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.
Take down policy
If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us (research.lib@cbs.dk) providing details, and we will remove access to
the work immediately and investigate your claim.
Download date: 10. Aug. 2022

Achieving Shared Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Value Creation:
Toward a Social Resource-based View (SRBV) of the Firm
Wendy Tate and Lydia Bals
Journal article (Post print version)
CITE: Achieving Shared Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Value Creation: Toward a
Social Resource-based View (SRBV) of the Firm. / Tate, Wendy; Bals, Lydia.
In: Journal of Business Ethics, 18.10.2016.
The final publication is available at Springer via
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3344-y
Uploaded to @CBS: May 2017

Accepted version status October 2016; Journal of Business Ethics
1
Achieving Shared Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Value Creation: Toward a Social
Resource-Based View (SRBV) of the Firm
Wendy L. Tate
University of Tennessee
Lydia Bals
University of Applied Sciences Mainz;
Copenhagen Business School
Please see final version:
Tate, W.L., & Bals, L. (Forthcoming): Achieving Shared Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Value
Creation: Toward a Social Resource-Based View (SRBV) of the Firm, Journal of Business
Ethics.
Abstract
Whereas the economic and environmental dimensions of the triple bottom line (TBL) have
been covered extensively by management theory and practice, the social dimension remains
largely underrepresented. The Resource-based View (RBV) of the firm and the Natural
Resource-based View (NRBV) of the firm are revisited to lay the theoretical foundation for
exploring how the social dimension might be addressed. Social capabilities are then explored
by looking at the social entrepreneurship literature and illustrative cases with the purpose of
elaborating RBV toward a Social Resource-based View (SRBV) of the firm. Three illustrative
cases, which represent social businesses located in catastrophe-ridden Haiti, show how
capabilities are used to overcome challenging constraints. The goal for the social entrepreneur
is to employ the appropriate capabilities to ensure economic success, a positive environmental
impact, and social benefits that leave the local community in a better position than without the
business. Just as NRBV is a previous elaboration of RBV, so can SRBV be an elaborated
theoretical foundation for future research. The components of a theory are systematically
addressed by extending the range of variables (adding social capabilities), extending the
domain (including stakeholders with economic, environmental and/or social stakes), and
offering propositions on variable relationships and outcome predictions (linking social
capabilities and shared TBL value creation). By highlighting the social capabilities of social
entrepreneurs, this research illuminates the micro-foundations of Corporate Social
Responsibility (CSR), emphasizing the value of individual level analyses.
Keywords: Natural Resource-based View, Resource-based View, Shared Value,
Sustainability, Triple Bottom Line, Social Business, Social Entrepreneurship

Accepted version status October 2016; Journal of Business Ethics
2
INTRODUCTION
Today, “sustainable business” still represents an economically-focused perspective
which employs varying degrees of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) efforts such as
energy efficiency, reduced carbon footprint, recycling and reuse, fair employee treatment, and
charitable giving (Fallon 2014). Businesses taking this perspective have addressed only a small
portion of the global sustainability challenges, which have grown in proportion.
Environmentally, for example, the current worldwide resource footprint requires
approximately 1.5 planets to sustain existing life, and by 2030 closer to two planets will be
needed to sustain consumption (Moore et al. 2012). In 2016, actual worldwide consumption
surpassed the budgeted resources by August 8
th
(Global Footprint Network 2016). Socially,
about 900 million people in the developing world live at or below US $1.90 per day (World
Bank 2015) and have restricted access to rapidly diminishing natural resources.
These current challenges highlight that instead of embracing a new paradigm in which
environmental and social concerns may come first (Montabon et al. 2016), corporations are
still highly influenced and rewarded by the popular notion that the business of business is
business; in other words creating profit for shareholders (Friedman 1970). On the one hand,
the increasing coverage of CSR topics in annual reports suggests an awareness of additional
stakeholders’ concerns related to social and environmental issues (Tate et al. 2010). On the
other, in practice organizations are still challenged in responding holistically to the call from
stakeholders (Matos and Silvestre 2013) to consider the firm as a coalition of suppliers of
resources with the aim to increase collective wealth
1
(Freeman and Reed 1983) in the system
versus the independent wealth of a single firm.
1
Collective wealth has evolved into concepts such as TBL sustainability (Triple Bottom Line; economic,
environmental and social; Elkington, 1998) and shared value (Porter and Kramer, 2006, 2011).

Accepted version status October 2016; Journal of Business Ethics
3
In line with practice, business research has predominantly focused on how companies
achieve economic performance or sustained competitive advantage by deploying specific
capabilities (e.g. Barney 1991; Teece et al. 1997; Teece 2007; Wernerfelt 1984). However, the
capabilities needed to address ecological and, particularly, social issues are comparatively
unexplored (e.g. Norman and MacDonald 2004; Hart and Milstein 2003). While the Resource-
based View (RBV) brought to research and practice the terminology and framework needed to
understand how companies derive economic sustained competitive advantage from resources
and capabilities, and Natural Resource-based View (NRBV) addressed these resources and
capabilities on the environmental outcome side, neither focused on social capabilities or triple
bottom line (TBL) sustainability.
There are some organizations, often entrepreneurial start-ups or small businesses
2
, that
pursue impacts that address these stakeholder issues holistically (Lyons 2013). Social
entrepreneurs look at TBL impact to stakeholders on both the demand and supply side of the
business model (Thake and Zadek 1997). Social business models create value by addressing
economic, environmental, and social elements, by promoting equitable relationships among
stakeholders, and by adopting a fair revenue model (Boons and Luedeke-Freund 2013). Such
innovative social business models aim to address holistically all three sets of constraints -
economic, social, and environmental - of the context in which they are operating, especially
when in developing countries or catastrophe-stricken countries (Yunus et al. 2010). These
contexts often include issues of resource scarcity, absence of intermediaries, weak regulatory
systems, and contract-enforcing mechanisms (Khanna and Yafeh 2005) and have greater
transaction costs (Hahn and Gold 2014). This makes social businesses particularly interesting
when viewed as laboratories that can help identify capabilities needed to manage a broad and
2
Social business models can be adopted by firms of various sizes and start-ups (e.g. Pura Vida Coffee; Wilson
and Post, 2013) or existing firms (e.g. the Grameen Danone collaboration; Yunus et al., 2010).

Frequently asked questions

Q1. What are the contributions mentioned in the paper "Achieving shared triple bottom line (tbl) value creation" ?

By highlighting the social capabilities of social entrepreneurs, this research illuminates the micro-foundations of Corporate Social Responsibility ( CSR ), emphasizing the value of individual level analyses. 

Q2. What are the future works in "Achieving shared triple bottom line (tbl) value creation" ?

Instead, it was proposed that all three are part of an overall theoretical base for future research ( Figure 3 ). Such a shift could also help further remedy the situation that CSR too often becomes a “ company ” issue rather than a people issue, preventing full commitment by the workforce ( Juran 1995 ). As for limitations, while the following must be acknowledged, they also open avenues for future research. Future research could investigate this aspect by taking into account recent work on the anthropocentric versus ecocentric perspective ( Borland et al. 2016 ) or the ecologically dominant logic mentioned earlier ( Montabon et al. 2016 ).