My understanding of "sustainable" management refers to balancing multiple forms of well-being, including financial, social, ecological, physical, spiritual and psychological well-being. Much of my research provides the theoretical, conceptual and empirical bases for differentiating between Financial Bottom Line (FBL) management, Triple Bottom Line (TBL) management, and Social and Ecological Thought (SET) management (as described in textbook by Dyck, Caza & Starke, 2018).
Dyck, B. (2020). The integral common good: Implications for Mele's seven key practices of
humanistsic management. Humanistic Management Journal, 5(1): 7-23.
Building on previous understandings of the common good (which tend to focus on a particular community of people or on humankind generally), this paper develops the idea of the integral common good (which refers to the conditions of social and ecological life association with a flourishing holistic community), and describes implications for management practice. What if managers had a moral responsiblity to enhance the well-being of the socio-ecological community we all belong to?
Dyck, B., Walker, K., & Caza, A. (2019). Antecedents of sustainable organizing: A look at
the relationship between organizational culutre and the triple bottom line. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 231: 1235-1247.
This paper examines predicted relationships between the four types of culture associated with the competing values framework (clan, bureaucracy, market, and adhocracy) and four emphases in sustainability (social, financial, ecological, and general).
Dyck, B. & Silvestre, B. (2019). Enhancing socio-ecological value creation through
sustainable innovlation 2.0: Moving away from maximizing financial value capture. Journal
of Cleaner Production, 171: 1593-1604.
This empirical paper shows how radical organization theory may be better-suited than conventional theory to serve the needs of managers of the world’s most prevalent and neediest organizational form: there are 500 million small-scale farms (less than 5 acres), and 70 percent of the world’s chronically-malnourished people live on small-scale farms.
Dyck, B. & Silvestre, B. (2019). A novel approach to sustainable innovation in an
international development context: Lessons from small-scale farms in Nicaragua.
Organization Studies, 40(3): 443-461.
This grounded theory paper presents counter-mainstream approach for promoting agronomic innovations that promote socio-ecological well-being.
Dyck, B., & Greidanus, N.S. (2017). Quantum Sustainable Organizing Theory: A study of
Organization Theory as if matter mattered. Journal of Management Inquiry, 26(1): 32-46.
This paper draws on quantum ideas like entanglement and uncertainty to develop socio-ecologically sustainable organization theory that challenges the Newtonian assumptions that underpin conventional organization and management theory.
Dyck, B. (working paper). “Radical sustainable entrepreneurship: A typology and a process
model.”
This theory building paper develops a multidimensional typological framework regarding what constitutes sustainable entrepreneurship, and develops a model of radical sustainable entrepreneurship that is both paradigmatic in scope and processual in nature.
Neubert, M., & Dyck, B. (2016). "Developing sustainable management theory: Goal-setting
theory based in virtue." Management Decision, 54(2): 304-320.
This paper develops goal-setting theory based on virtue theory.
Walker, K., N. Ni and B. Dyck (2015). “Recipes for successful sustainability: Empirical
organizational configurations for strong Corporate Environmental Performance.” Business
Strategy and the Environment, 24(1): 40-57.
This paper develops four empirical archetypal organizational configurations associated with strong corporate environmental performance based on a set of 45 case studies. The organizational configurations represent different approaches to the external environment, organization structure and strategy.
Christie, N., B. Dyck. J. Morrill, and R. Stewart (2013). “CSR and accounting: Drawing on
Weber and Aristotle to rethink Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.” Business
and Society Review, 118 (3): 383-411.
This paper provides a conceptual framework and describes hallmarks associated with a more sustainable approach to accounting.
Walker, K., & B. Dyck (2014). “The primary importance of corporate social responsibility and
ethicality in corporation reputation: An empirical study.” Business and Society Review,
119(1): 147-174.
This paper demonstrates the importance of considering corporate social responsibility and ethicality when determining and organization's reputation (ethicality is more important than profitability), and to consider the views of multiple stakeholders.
Bell, G.G., and Dyck, B. (2012). “Conventional Resource-Based Theory and its radical
alternative: A less materialist-individualist approach to strategy.” Journal of Business
Ethics, 99(1): 121-130.
This paper presents a variation of Resource-Based Theory that is premised on a more sustainable or holistic assumptions than implicit in conventional theory.
Bell, G.G., Dyck, B. and Neubert, M. (2011). “Reconfiguring Porter’s generic strategies in a
virtuous world.” BPS Division, Academy of Management, San Antonio, TX.
This paper presents a variation of generic strategies that are premised on a more sustainable or holistic assumptions than implicit in conventional theory.
Driscoll, C., E. Wiebe and B. Dyck (2011). “Nature is prior to us: Applying Catholic Social
Thought and Anabaptist-Mennonite Theology to the ethics of stakeholder prioritization for
the natural environment.” Journal of Religion and Business Ethics, 3(1).
This article draws on theology to argue for seeing the natural environment as a stakeholder in organization and management theory.
Dyck, B., J. Buckland, H. Harder and D. Wiens (2000). “Community development as
organizational learning: The importance of agent-participant reciprocity.” Canadian Journal
of Development Studies, 21: 605-620.
This study applies a four-phase model of organizational to international development, paying particular attention to learning from the local communities where development initiatives are being developed and implemented.
Dyck, B. (1997). “Build in sustainable development and they will come: A vegetable field of
dreams.” British Food Journal, 99 (9): 325-335. (Note: Published in 1994 in Journal of
Organizational Change Management.)
Describes hallmarks of Community Shared Agriculture.
Dyck, B. (1994). “From airy-fairy ideals to concrete realities: The case of Shared Farming.”
Leadership Quarterly, 5: 227-246.
Describes hallmarks of leadership consistent with Community Shared Agriculture.
Dyck, B. (2012, July 17). “Small farms and the Future of the Planet.” The Manila Times.
A newspaper article that describes my research in international development.
Dyck, B. (2020). The integral common good: Implications for Mele's seven key practices of
humanistsic management. Humanistic Management Journal, 5(1): 7-23.
Building on previous understandings of the common good (which tend to focus on a particular community of people or on humankind generally), this paper develops the idea of the integral common good (which refers to the conditions of social and ecological life association with a flourishing holistic community), and describes implications for management practice. What if managers had a moral responsiblity to enhance the well-being of the socio-ecological community we all belong to?
Dyck, B., Walker, K., & Caza, A. (2019). Antecedents of sustainable organizing: A look at
the relationship between organizational culutre and the triple bottom line. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 231: 1235-1247.
This paper examines predicted relationships between the four types of culture associated with the competing values framework (clan, bureaucracy, market, and adhocracy) and four emphases in sustainability (social, financial, ecological, and general).
Dyck, B. & Silvestre, B. (2019). Enhancing socio-ecological value creation through
sustainable innovlation 2.0: Moving away from maximizing financial value capture. Journal
of Cleaner Production, 171: 1593-1604.
This empirical paper shows how radical organization theory may be better-suited than conventional theory to serve the needs of managers of the world’s most prevalent and neediest organizational form: there are 500 million small-scale farms (less than 5 acres), and 70 percent of the world’s chronically-malnourished people live on small-scale farms.
Dyck, B. & Silvestre, B. (2019). A novel approach to sustainable innovation in an
international development context: Lessons from small-scale farms in Nicaragua.
Organization Studies, 40(3): 443-461.
This grounded theory paper presents counter-mainstream approach for promoting agronomic innovations that promote socio-ecological well-being.
Dyck, B., & Greidanus, N.S. (2017). Quantum Sustainable Organizing Theory: A study of
Organization Theory as if matter mattered. Journal of Management Inquiry, 26(1): 32-46.
This paper draws on quantum ideas like entanglement and uncertainty to develop socio-ecologically sustainable organization theory that challenges the Newtonian assumptions that underpin conventional organization and management theory.
Dyck, B. (working paper). “Radical sustainable entrepreneurship: A typology and a process
model.”
This theory building paper develops a multidimensional typological framework regarding what constitutes sustainable entrepreneurship, and develops a model of radical sustainable entrepreneurship that is both paradigmatic in scope and processual in nature.
Neubert, M., & Dyck, B. (2016). "Developing sustainable management theory: Goal-setting
theory based in virtue." Management Decision, 54(2): 304-320.
This paper develops goal-setting theory based on virtue theory.
Walker, K., N. Ni and B. Dyck (2015). “Recipes for successful sustainability: Empirical
organizational configurations for strong Corporate Environmental Performance.” Business
Strategy and the Environment, 24(1): 40-57.
This paper develops four empirical archetypal organizational configurations associated with strong corporate environmental performance based on a set of 45 case studies. The organizational configurations represent different approaches to the external environment, organization structure and strategy.
Christie, N., B. Dyck. J. Morrill, and R. Stewart (2013). “CSR and accounting: Drawing on
Weber and Aristotle to rethink Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.” Business
and Society Review, 118 (3): 383-411.
This paper provides a conceptual framework and describes hallmarks associated with a more sustainable approach to accounting.
Walker, K., & B. Dyck (2014). “The primary importance of corporate social responsibility and
ethicality in corporation reputation: An empirical study.” Business and Society Review,
119(1): 147-174.
This paper demonstrates the importance of considering corporate social responsibility and ethicality when determining and organization's reputation (ethicality is more important than profitability), and to consider the views of multiple stakeholders.
Bell, G.G., and Dyck, B. (2012). “Conventional Resource-Based Theory and its radical
alternative: A less materialist-individualist approach to strategy.” Journal of Business
Ethics, 99(1): 121-130.
This paper presents a variation of Resource-Based Theory that is premised on a more sustainable or holistic assumptions than implicit in conventional theory.
Bell, G.G., Dyck, B. and Neubert, M. (2011). “Reconfiguring Porter’s generic strategies in a
virtuous world.” BPS Division, Academy of Management, San Antonio, TX.
This paper presents a variation of generic strategies that are premised on a more sustainable or holistic assumptions than implicit in conventional theory.
Driscoll, C., E. Wiebe and B. Dyck (2011). “Nature is prior to us: Applying Catholic Social
Thought and Anabaptist-Mennonite Theology to the ethics of stakeholder prioritization for
the natural environment.” Journal of Religion and Business Ethics, 3(1).
This article draws on theology to argue for seeing the natural environment as a stakeholder in organization and management theory.
Dyck, B., J. Buckland, H. Harder and D. Wiens (2000). “Community development as
organizational learning: The importance of agent-participant reciprocity.” Canadian Journal
of Development Studies, 21: 605-620.
This study applies a four-phase model of organizational to international development, paying particular attention to learning from the local communities where development initiatives are being developed and implemented.
Dyck, B. (1997). “Build in sustainable development and they will come: A vegetable field of
dreams.” British Food Journal, 99 (9): 325-335. (Note: Published in 1994 in Journal of
Organizational Change Management.)
Describes hallmarks of Community Shared Agriculture.
Dyck, B. (1994). “From airy-fairy ideals to concrete realities: The case of Shared Farming.”
Leadership Quarterly, 5: 227-246.
Describes hallmarks of leadership consistent with Community Shared Agriculture.
Dyck, B. (2012, July 17). “Small farms and the Future of the Planet.” The Manila Times.
A newspaper article that describes my research in international development.
