Does radical innovation predispose a firm to a lack of social connectedness?udCan improved governance practices compensate?udA case study on Monsanto, genetically modified crops and stakeholder dialogue

摘要

Most frameworks for ‘Corporate Social Responsibility’ posit stakeholder dialogue as essential tool for firms to be in touch with society’s needs and expectations. Successful and sustained dialogue requires integrity and some degree of mutual understanding and accountability. This case describes a situation in which achieving mutual understanding between a firm and environmental groups was not possible. Radical innovation led to re-organization, and this process undermined the firm’s integrity in that period. Moreover, not all environmental groups successful in influencing public opinion can claim the necessary integrity for such dialogue.udSecond, corporate and environmental groups used disparate modes of cognition, relying on different principles for establishing and verifying truth. In instances where a group’s identity and strategic objectives are deeply linked to just one mode of thought, self-reflection and understanding of the other may be too difficult. Dialogue with ‘translators’ may then be one option.