Production Planning & Control

The Management of Operations

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tppc20

The role of organisational culture in organisational

change towards sustainability: evidence from the
garment manufacturing industry

Chaminda Wijethilake, Bedanand Upadhaya & Tek Lama

To cite this article: Chaminda Wijethilake, Bedanand Upadhaya & Tek Lama (2023) The role
of organisational culture in organisational change towards sustainability: evidence from
the garment manufacturing industry, Production Planning & Control, 34:3, 275-294, DOI:
10.1080/09537287.2021.1913524

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2021.1913524

© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa Published online: 22 Apr 2021.

UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group.

Submit your article to this journal Article views: 7028

View related articles View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 5 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tppc20
PRODUCTION PLANNING & CONTROL
2023, VOL. 34, NO. 3, 275–294
https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2021.1913524

The role of organisational culture in organisational change towards

sustainability: evidence from the garment manufacturing industry
Chaminda Wijethilakea , Bedanand Upadhayaa and Tek Lamab
a
Essex Business School, University of Essex, Colchester, UK; bCollege of Business and Law, Victoria University, Sydney, Australia

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

This paper explores the competing role of organisational culture in organisational change towards sus- Received 8 September 2019
tainability. Drawing on the competing values framework, data was collected by interviewing senior Accepted 2 April 2021
executives and sustainability managers of a leading multinational garment manufacturing organisation
KEYWORDS
based in Sri Lanka. The study finds that organisational culture tends to play a proactive role by going
Organisational culture;
beyond the compliances and regulatory requirements in organisational change towards sustainability. organisational change;
Four competing cultural values appear to shape their corporate sustainability approach, namely (i) corporate sustainability;
people-oriented changes (e.g. empowerment, training, development, team orientation, leadership), (ii) garment manufactur-
growth-oriented changes (e.g. sustainability innovations, continuous improvements, community ing industry
engagement), (iii) productivity- and efficiency-oriented changes (e.g. use of professional recommenda-
tions, open communication), and (iv) stability- and control-oriented changes (e.g. sustainability budget-
ing, investment appraisal, life-cycle assessment). The case organisation is more likely to be driven by
an integrated approach of the four competing cultural values rather than by one dominant approach.
The study contributes to the organisational culture and sustainability literature by highlighting the
importance of aligning competing cultural values as a means of addressing sustainability challenges,
in the much-debated garment manufacturing industry in the South Asian context. Finally, a framework
for sustainability organisational culture is proposed.

1. Introduction 2018) urges business organisations to align their operations

and strategies with globally accepted principles of human
The term ‘corporate sustainability1’ has received considerable
rights, labour, environment and anti-corruption. In addition,
attention from researchers and practitioners in the contem-
the UNGC encourages organisations to take strategic actions
porary business world, and it appears that the importance of
to enhance their sustainable development goals. Regardless
the concept is increasing (Linnenluecke and Griffiths 2010;
pez- of the growing importance of corporate sustainability, align-
Van der Byl and Slawinski 2015; Caiado et al. 2019; Lo
Torres et al. 2019). An extensive body of academic literature ing sustainability goals with internal organisational opera-
has examined the research underpinning this topic from dif- tions appears to be a challenging task, due to inherent
ferent perspectives, with a widely examined topic being the tensions in sustainability operations (Margolis and Walsh
corporate sustainability – performance relationship (see, 2003; Van der Byl and Slawinski 2015; Caiado et al. 2019).
Margolis and Walsh 2003; Orlitzky, Schmidt, and Rynes 2003; Many organisations adopting and implementing sustain-
Peloza 2009; Albertini 2013). The topic has also received ability face the tension between profit (or economic perform-
much attention from the practitioner’s perspective. Some ance) and their responsibilities towards society and the
notable examples include Porter and Kramer (2006, 2011) environment (see Margolis and Walsh 2003; Smith and Lewis
articles on the link between competitive advantage and cor- 2011; Van der Byl and Slawinski 2015; Hahn et al. 2018), as
porate social responsibility and creating shared value. A sustainability includes three competing but interrelated goals
recent corporate sustainability survey report shows that 90 (i.e. social, environmental and economic) (Elkington 1998;
per cent of corporate executives surveyed consider Bansal 2005; Van der Byl and Slawinski 2015). Maximisation
‘sustainability’ as an important phenomenon (Kiron et al. of profit or increasing shareholders’ value is considered as
2017). In particular, KPMG’s (2017) report reveals that most the primary purpose of business organisations. However,
of the large organisations include corporate responsibility ignoring other important stakeholders’ demands and their
reporting in their annual financial reports and this trend is commercial impact on the environment, may raise questions
increasing. Stressing the importance of the corporate sustain- about whether such practice will affect their survival in the
ability agenda, the United Nations Global Compact (UNGC long-term (see Caiado et al. 2019; Lopez-Torres et al. 2019).

CONTACT Chaminda Wijethilake c.wijethilake@essex.ac.uk Essex Business School, University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester, CO4 3SQ, UK
ß 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/
4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon
in any way.
276 C. WIJETHILAKE ET AL.

In order to address the tension between economic perform- Sawabe (2015) argue that flexibility is the most suitable
ance and social/environmental responsibility, prior research approach to address sustainability challenges, several other
emphasises the win-win (business case for sustainability) strands of literature indicate that organisations are more
approach, trade-offs and integrative approach (balancing likely to implement structured or hierarchical control systems
social, environmental and economic dimensions) (see Carroll in managing sustainability practices (Wijethilake, Munir, and
and Shabana 2010; Porter and Kramer 2006, 2011; Marshall Appuhami 2017). For example, Upadhaya et al. (2018) high-
et al. 2015; Van der Byl and Slawinski 2015; Hahn et al. light the importance of ‘innovation’ and a ‘respect for peo-
2018). However, much of the prior research focussing on the ple’ culture to integrate sustainability into strategies, while
business case approach either provides a conceptual framing Dubey et al. (2017) emphasise the need to embrace a mix of
or examines the link between corporate social responsibility ‘flexible’ and ‘control’ oriented culture to achieve sustainable
(or corporate social/environmental performance) and finan- performance. Although these studies shed light on the role
cial performance (see Margolis and Walsh 2003; Orlitzky, of organisational culture in corporate sustainability, most of
Schmidt, and Rynes 2003; Peloza 2009; Albertini 2013). these studies focus on either one or two aspects of organisa-
Although these studies offer some insights on the concept tional culture. Moving towards either extreme might under-
and practice of sustainability and its implication for organisa- mine viable organisational changes towards sustainability
tional performance, it still remains unclear in the literature goals. Therefore, a question worth addressing is whether
how organisations can address their conflicting social, envir- organisations should focus on a unique approach or on an
onmental and economic goals in the empirical context integrated approach. Accordingly, our research question is:
(Linnenluecke and Griffiths 2010; Van der Byl and Slawinski what is the role of competing organisational culture values
2015; Hahn et al. 2018; Caiado et al. 2019). in organisational change towards sustainability?
As a means of responding to competing sustainability In order to address this question, this study draws on the
challenges, while many organisations attempt to focus on competing values framework (CVF) (Quinn and Rohrbaugh
technical solutions, such attempts may encounter difficulties 1983; Quinn and Kimberly 1984). Extant literature suggests
to deliver expected outcomes without changing people’s that competing perspectives of (i) external and internal ori-
attitude and value systems (Lozano 2013; Marshall et al. entations, and (ii) control and flexibility approaches are likely
2015; Lo pez-Torres et al. 2019; Caiado et al. 2019). to drive sustainability operations within an organisation
Combining human value systems and technical processes, (Linnenluecke and Griffiths 2010; Sroufe 2017). Based on the
framework, we explore how organisations manage compet-
Schneider, Brief, and Guzzo (1996) argue that both climate
ing values to address corporate sustainability challenges in
(i.e. what people experience – policies, procures and practi-
the empirical context. Using a case study method, data were
ces) and culture (i.e. what people believe the organisational collected by interviewing the senior executives and sustain-
values are) are essential for sustainable organisational ability managers at a leading multinational garment manu-
change. In particular, organisational culture is seen as an facturing organisation based in Sri Lanka. This best-in-class
important factor in fostering or hindering organisational case organisation was purposively selected to provide exem-
change towards sustainability (Harris and Crane 2002; plary industry evidence to substantiate the role of organisa-
Linnenluecke and Griffiths 2010; Lozano 2013; Sroufe 2017). tional culture in organisational change towards sustainability.
Linnenluecke and Griffiths (2010) suggest that the successful By exploring a family-owned multinational garment manu-
implementation of culture change towards corporate sustain- facturing group in South Asia, this case study finds that an
ability largely depends on organisational shared norms and integrated and balanced approach of competing perspec-
values. In contrast, employees’ resistance to changes, lack of tives of organisational culture values (e.g. internal vs external
top management support, failure to adopt new systems and and flexibility vs control) are more likely to promote organ-
practices, and reluctance to get expert advice and linear isational change towards sustainability. By proposing a
thinking, prevent organisational changes towards sustainabil- framework for a sustainable organisational culture, this study
ity. These barriers to change may be due to various factors contributes to the organisational change and sustainability
such as informational, emotional, behavioural and systematic literature by highlighting the role of organisational culture as
organisational consequences (Lozano 2013). a means of addressing the three perspectives of sustainabil-
While the importance of organisational culture in address- ity challenges (social, environmental and economic).
ing the corporate sustainability challenge is growing (see, The remainder of this paper is structured as follows.
Linnenluecke and Griffiths 2010; Erthal and Marques 2018), Section 2 reviews the literature on corporate sustainability,
there is still little insight into the types of competing organ- organisational culture, and the competing values framework,
isational culture that drive corporate sustainability within and outlines their significance to this study. Section 3 dis-
organisations. For example, some studies suggest that cor- cusses the research methods, and Section 4 presents the
porate sustainability is predominantly driven by external empirical analysis illustrating the role of competing organisa-
forces (e.g. Wijethilake, Munir, and Appuhami 2017) while tional culture values in organisational change towards sus-
others, that internal forces within an organisation are the key tainability. Proposing a conceptual framework, Section 5
drivers of corporate sustainability (see Baumgartner 2009; presents a detailed discussion of the empirical findings, and
Linnenluecke and Griffiths 2010; Upadhaya et al. 2018; finally, Section 6 provides a conclusion and highlights the
Wijethilake and Lama 2019). While Jollands, Akroyd, and contributions of this study.
 PRODUCTION PLANNING & CONTROL 277

2. Background literature and theoretical framework with the competing sustainability objectives – win-win (or
business case), trade-offs, integrative and paradox. The win-
2.1. Corporate sustainability win perspective suggests the alignment between social,
Sustainability is seen as one of the main drivers of change in environmental and economic goals, where improvement in
current business practices (Shibin et al. 2018). A number of one element of sustainability is expected to improve the
sustainability change drivers are discussed in the literature, other dimensions (see for example, Porter and Kramer 2006).
such as tighter government regulations and certification The trade-off approach avoids tension by providing a
requirements (Marshall et al. 2015), increased global con- (forced) choice between three elements of sustainability. The
sumer demands (Lo pez-Torres et al. 2019), and competitive integrative approach attempts to integrate all three dimen-
market pressure (Caiado et al. 2019). Organisations are facing sions (i.e. social, environmental and economic) without
mounting pressure from a range of stakeholder groups, con- favouring one over the other. Paradox theory explains the
sumer watchdogs and regulatory bodies to reconsider their different approaches to tensions as inherent in competing
business model and make it more sustainable (Dubey et al. sustainability objectives (see, Van der Byl and Slawinski 2015;
2017, 2019; Lo pez-Torres et al. 2019). Although organisations Hahn et al. 2018). While these prior studies uncover different
have enhanced efficiency in their productions and operations types of sustainability tensions and provide some valuable
process and improved their financial performance by imple- insights on how organisations can use different approaches
menting a range of innovative systems, technical tools and to balance their conflicting obligations towards their share-
techniques and management practices to a large extent, the holders, environment and society, most of these studies are
current mode of production is still criticised for its negative conceptual. Therefore, there is a call for more empirical
impacts on the environment and society (Lo pez-Torres et al. research on corporate sustainability (Marshall et al. 2015; Van
2019). Researchers argue that organisations’ long-term sur- der Byl and Slawinski 2015; Caiado et al. 2019; Lo pez-Torres
vival not only depends on profit in this competitive business et al. 2019).
environment, but also on meeting their obligations to the In order to minimise the negative impacts of their unsus-
environment and society (Caiado et al. 2019). tainable operation and production practices (Lo pez-Torres
Corporate sustainability is a complex and multidimen- et al. 2019) and meet increasing demand from global stake-
sional concept and defined in a number of ways. With refer- holders’ for sustainable products and services (see, Nielsen
ence to the concept of sustainable development (WCED 2015), many organisations and their leaders incorporate a
1987), Bansal (2005, p. 199) argues that sustainability can be number of sustainability strategies, management innovations
achieved ‘only at the intersection of the three principles’ – and technological solutions, and also follow increased report-
environmental integrity, economic prosperity, and social ing guidelines and practices (KPMG 2017). However, some
equity (WCED 1987; Bansal 2005), also termed as the ‘triple- recent studies (e.g. Caiado et al. 2019; Lo pez-Torres et al.
bottom-line’ (Elkington 1998). Theoretically, all three dimen- 2019) suggest that organisations cannot just achieve sustain-
sions are clearly of equal important and necessary conditions ability by implementing practices, such as lean manufactur-
to achieve sustainability (WCED 1987; Elkington 1998; ing or Six Sigma; rather, they need to be well aware of ‘why
Margolis and Walsh 2003; Bansal 2005; Hahn et al. 2018). and how’ to incorporate sustainability practices. There is evi-
However, prior literature provides little empirical evidence on dence to suggest that balancing all three elements of corpor-
how organisations can achieve a balance between three ate sustainability simultaneously is challenging in practice.
interrelated yet competing (i.e. social, environmental and For example, ‘Wal-Mart has some of the most stringent and
economic) goals (Van der Byl and Slawinski 2015). advanced sustainability supply chain guidelines and practices
A large number of empirical studies have examined the but is criticised for the treatment of people in its supply
relationships between social/environmental performance and chain’ (Marshall et al. 2015, p. 4). This raises a fundamental
economic (or financial) performance in the past four decades question of whether adopting the best sustainability strat-
(see, Margolis and Walsh 2003; Orlitzky, Schmidt, and Rynes egies, guidelines, policies and practices is sufficient to
2003; Peloza 2009). However, the research findings are incon- achieve the goal of sustainable business practices.
clusive and mixed. While a majority of the studies provide
some evidence to support the claim that social and environ-
2.2. Organisational culture
mental performance improve the organisations’ financial per-
formance, other studies reveal negative relationships A review of prior studies suggests that successful implemen-
between social/environmental and financial performance. tation of corporate sustainability largely depends on funda-
Although these studies shed light on the effects of social mental changes in organisational culture rather than just
and environmental performance, their mixed empirical find- making superficial changes or simply adopting sustainability
ings do not appear to resolve the ongoing sustainability ten- measures and publication of sustainability reports (see
sion of balancing social, environmental and economic Linnenluecke and Griffiths 2010). Although organisational
performance. culture is defined by various means (see Linnenluecke and
In their comprehensive review of prior sustainability stud- Griffiths 2010; Cameron and Quinn 2011), for the purpose of
ies, Van der Byl and Slawinski (2015) examine how sustain- this study, we adopt Cameron and Quinn (2011, p. 18) defin-
ability tensions have been managed and identify four ition of ‘ … socially constructed attribute of organizations
different approaches that researchers have suggested to deal that serves as the social glue binding an organization
278 C. WIJETHILAKE ET AL.

together’. Some of the common attributes of organisational organisational culture in a CVF; Galpin et al.’s (2015) multidis-
culture include shared assumptions, norms, values and ciplinary organisational culture model; Florea, Cheung, and
beliefs, (Linnenluecke and Griffiths 2010; Liu et al. 2010), Herndon (2013) human resource values model;
which provide its members guidelines, though often unwrit- Baumgartner’s (2014) conceptualisation of organisational cul-
ten and unspoken, on how an organisation functions and its ture as a normative management practice .
social system (Cameron and Quinn 2011). From the empirical perspective, a smaller number of stud-
Since the 1980s, prior studies have acknowledged the ies have focussed on different aspects of organisational cul-
important role of organisational culture in terms of imple- ture in sustainability literature. For example, Harris and Crane
menting sustainability practices (see, Linnenluecke and (2002) reveal managers’ perception of green cultural
Griffiths 2010; Erthal and Marques 2018). Most successful changes, barriers and facilitators to such changes, whereas
organisations understand that adopting new management Morsing and Oswald (2009) reveal that top management pro-
practices that are in line with their culture improve the vides sustainable leadership by referring to the role of organ-
chance of implementation being successful and improve isational culture as a management control system. Examining
their performance (see, Altay et al. 2018). However, organisa- the role of organisational culture and leadership as a precon-
tional changes from traditional to sustainable management dition of sustainable development, Baumgartner (2009)
require substantial internal changes that can be supported emphasises that the role of organisational culture in the sus-
by organisational culture (Epstein and Buhovac 2014; tainable development context has been largely underesti-
Wijethilake and Lama 2019). While change is seen as an mated. Similarly, Ong, Magsi, and Burgess (2019) examine
opportunity (Lozano 2013), organisations need to manage the role of organisational culture in management control sys-
the process by making their employees aware of the import- tems and environmental performance and highlight that the
ance of sustainability in the global and local operations and stable and flexible values of organisational culture influence
also need a changed mindset to integrate sustainability into the effective use of formal and informal environmental man-
business priorities (Lo pez-Torres et al. 2019). Widely shared agement systems. Pennington and More (2016) reveal two
norms, values and social system can help employees under- distinct cultural perspectives – general cultural dimensions
stand organisational functioning (Liu et al. 2010; Dubey et al. and specific sustainability cultural dimensions, each of which
2019), which will ultimately change their attitude towards influence organisational sustainability. While the findings of
being sustainable, to the extent that it is encouraged by the these studies provide overall insights on barriers to and facil-
senior management (Linnenluecke and Griffiths 2010). itators of, green cultural change (Harris and Crane 2002), cul-
Cameron and Quinn (2011) suggest that changes in employ- ture as a control system (Morsing and Oswald 2009), culture
ees’ norms, values and attitude guide them in terms of the and leadership (Baumgartner 2009; Tortorella et al. 2020) and
way they interact and behave. Organisations with a strong culture’s role in sustainability (Pennington and More 2016),
sustainability culture can motivate employees’ behaviour other studies mainly focus on specific traits of organisa-
towards sustainability practices and ensure their engagement tional culture.
and support to accomplish sustainability goals (Linnenluecke Dubey et al. (2017) investigate the moderating role of
and Griffiths 2010; Epstein and Buhovac 2014; Wijethilake organisational culture (i.e. flexible and control) on the associ-
and Lama 2019). ation between institutional pressures and performance meas-
While the role of organisational culture is widely acknowl- urement systems for sustainability benchmarking. The
edged by prior studies on sustainability adoption, others authors find that flexible and control orientations of organ-
argue that it can also be a primary reason for the failure of isational culture seem to play different roles, and suggest
implementing change towards sustainability (see, that organisations need to embrace a hybrid (i.e. mix of both
Linnenluecke and Griffiths 2010; Erthal and Marques 2018). - flexible and control) orientation to achieve sustainable per-
For example, prior studies indicate that ‘ … as much as formance. Another study by Upadhaya et al. (2018) examines
three-quarters of the most popular approaches to organiza- the mediating role of organisational culture on sustainability
tional change … are not successful because they are based – strategy relationship using survey data collected from a
on technocentric changes, which neglect the human elem- developing country, Nepal. The authors find that innovation
ent, such as attitudes, culture, and behaviours’ (Lozano 2013, and respect for people play an important role in integrating
p. 279). It can be inferred that organisational culture can sustainability practices into organisations’ strategies. The
play a critical role in terms of determining the success or fail- findings of these studies highlight the important roles of
ure of organisations’ change towards sustainability practices. ‘flexibility’, ‘control’ (Dubey et al. 2017), and ‘innovation’ and
In recognition of the importance of organisational culture ‘respect for people’ (Upadhaya et al. 2018) dimensions of
in corporate sustainability, a growing body of research has organisational culture to achieve sustainability. However, in
contributed to the discipline from both theoretical and their recent study of Indian manufacturing organisations,
empirical perspectives. Theoretical studies propose new con- Dubey et al. (2019) could not find any evidence for the mod-
ceptual models or theoretical propositions based on existing erating role of flexible and control oriented culture in associ-
models, by integrating sustainability and organisational cul- ation between big data and predictive analysis, and social/
ture. Salient among them, in the literature are: Bertels, environmental performance. These mixed empirical findings
Papania, and Papania (2010) cultural wheel framework; raise a significant question on the critical role of organisa-
Linnenluecke and Griffiths (2010) conceptualisation of tional culture on organisational change towards
 PRODUCTION PLANNING & CONTROL 279

Flexibility on the structure of the organisation in terms of degree of

control. In other words, what level of control (or flexibility) is
Human Relations Model (Clan) Open System Model (Adhocracy) applied in the organisational structure and management. Liu
et al. (2010) argue that a flexibility orientation values creativ-
Means: Cohesion; morale Means: Flexibility; readiness
Ends: Human Resource Development Ends: Growth; resource acquisition ity and risk taking, while a control orientation focuses on
Internal External
order and efficiency. The internal vs external dimension
focuses on the activities occurring within and outside of the
Means: Information Management; Means: Planning; goal setting
communication Ends: Productivity; efficiency organisation (Quinn and Rohrbaugh 1983; Liu et al. 2010).
Ends: Stability; control Based on these two key competing dimensions, CVF further
Internal Process Model (Hierarchy) Rational Goal Model (Market) forms four cells (culture types): human relations model (clan),
open system model (adhocracy), internal process model
Control
(hierarchy) and rational goal model (market) (Quinn and
Figure 1. Competing values framework.
Rohrbaugh 1983).
The upper left quadrant in Figure 1 indicates the human
relations (or clan) culture, which is characterised by team-
sustainability. To address this question, this study draws on
work, employee involvement programmes, participative deci-
the competing value framework (CVF) (Quinn and
sion making and a friendly place to work (Linnenluecke and
Rohrbaugh 1983; Quinn and Kimberly 1984), which is widely
Griffiths 2010; Cameron and Quinn 2011). Human relations
used in prior studies (see, Liu et al. 2010; Linnenluecke and
culture focuses on employee development, empowerment
Griffiths 2010; Dubey et al. 2019). The framework is discussed
and loyalty, where leaders are seen as mentors. Open system
in the next section.
(or adhocracy) culture (upper right quadrant) encourages
innovation, entrepreneurship, creativity and risk taking (Liu
2.2.1. Organisational culture: a competing val- et al. 2010). Open system culture emphasises growth, resour-
ues framework ces acquisition and experimentation, where success means
The competing values framework (CVF) (Quinn and Rohrbaugh producing unique products or services (Cameron and Quinn
1983; Quinn and Kimberly 1984) provides a theoretical basis to 2011). Organisational cultural values dominated by the
understand the competing role of organisational culture in internal process (or hierarchy) model (lower left quadrant)
organisational change towards sustainability. While several promote stability and control. A hierarchy culture is charac-
frameworks explain the cultural aspect of organisations (e.g. terised by formalised and structured places to work
Schein 1997; Ashkanasy, Broadfoot, and Falkus 2000), no frame- (Cameron and Quinn 2011). Hierarchy culture emphasises
work covers all aspects comprehensively. uniformity, efficiency and close adherence to formal rules,
Key reasons for using CVF in this study include – (i) the regulations and organisational policies (Liu et al. 2010;
CVF has been empirically developed, (ii) it has been validated Dubey et al. 2017). The rational goal (or market) culture
by prior studies, and (iii) it encompasses most of the organ- (lower right quadrant) focuses on market share, productivity
isational cultural aspects (Cameron and Quinn 2011). Its use and achievement (Cameron and Quinn 2011). A market cul-
is also consistent with the approach taken by extant litera- ture is characterised by goal setting, planning and central-
ture. For example, Linnenluecke and Griffiths (2010) used ised decision making (Linnenluecke and Griffiths 2010),
CVF to discuss the conceptual relationship between corpor- which is mainly motivated by external competition (Liu
ate sustainability and organisational cultural dimensions et al. 2010).
within the organisational context. More importantly, the CVF While the four cultural types described above seem to be
aligns with ‘ … well-known and well accepted categorical opposite and mutually exclusive to one another, research
schemes that organize the way people think, their values shows that organisations may experience all cultural types
and assumptions, and the way they process information’ together (Linnenluecke and Griffiths 2010). However, Quinn
(Cameron and Quinn 2011, p. 37). Further, Liu et al. (2010) and Kimberly (1984) caution that some cultural types can be
argue that CVF can be seen as an appropriate model to more dominant than others. On the whole, each culture type
study organisational culture in the context of developing emphasises important aspects of an organisation: human
countries. This is mainly because of its relevance to many resources, flexibility, stability and productivity (Linnenluecke
business organisations that are still in a growth stage and and Griffiths 2010), which together shape an organisation’s
because their business priorities constantly change. Prior culture towards sustainable and environmentally responsible
empirical studies have applied CVF to study the role of business practices.
organisational culture in the manufacturing and services
industries of developing countries such as China and India
3. Methods
(see, Liu et al. 2010; Dubey et al. 2017). Figure 1 depicts
the CVF. The extant literature provides plenty of evidence as to why
As shown in Figure 1, the CVF consists of four cells that and how organisations should respond to both external and
are presented in two separate and competing dimensions: internal sustainability demands. The gap in the literature is in
flexibility vs control, and internal vs external (Quinn and terms of how organisations should change to embrace sus-
Rohrbaugh 1983). The flexibility vs control dimension focuses tainability and what the role of organisational culture is in
280 C. WIJETHILAKE ET AL.

this process. More specifically, this study explores the role of 3.2. Case study research design: case organisation
competing organisational culture values in organisational
The study employs a single case study which provides an
change towards sustainability. To do this, we have adopted a
opportunity for a rich and an in-dept understanding of the
qualitative approach. Studies that adopt this approach reflect
phenomenon explored (Voss, Tsikriktsis, and Frohlich 2002),
an interpretivist (Guba and Lincoln 1994; Lincoln 2010) or
in this case, the role of organisational culture in changing
constructivist paradigm (Creswell 2014), whereby knowledge
towards sustainability. Extant literature in sustainable opera-
creation is subjective, human beings determine social reality tions provides evidence of referring to leading single case
and knowledge is value-laden (Creswell 2014). Case studies organisations (e.g. Goodman 2000). As in the case of the cur-
facilitate a unique opportunity to investigate contemporary rent study, single case also provides an opportunity to
research phenomena in a real-life context (Yin 2009; Lincoln explore different contexts within the same case study (Voss,
2010; Silverman 2013). Further, case studies are suited to in- Tsikriktsis, and Frohlich 2002). For instance, the selected case
depth explanatory examinations in the exclusive research organisation consists of a wide range of manufacturing and
setting, deriving data from diverse bases (Yin 2009). services operations in diverse geographical contexts. Yet, sin-
gle cases have their own limitations, such as generalisability
of findings, potential risk of making an incorrect estimation
3.1. Research context: garment manufacturing industry of an isolated incident and excessively highlighting easily
in Sri Lanka available data sources (Voss, Tsikriktsis, and Frohlich 2002).
The results reported in the current study are also associated
The garment industry has been much criticised in sustainabil-
with the inherent limitations of providing a comprehensive
ity debates due to its increasingly unsustainable manufactur- picture of sustainable operations in different industries (see,
ing practices and processes. The garment manufacturing Pagell and Wu 2009; Wu and Pagell 2011). The case organisa-
industry in Sri Lanka was selected as the research context for tion was purposely selected by applying tests to validate its
the following reasons. Firstly, Sri Lanka provides a unique sustainability commitment and operational approaches in
context to examine the role of organisational culture with the garment manufacturing industry locally and globally
reference to sustainability (Perry, Wood, and Fernie 2015). Sri (Voss, Tsikriktsis, and Frohlich 2002). The study undertook a
Lankan national culture is mainly dominated by Buddhist background assessment of the GMO’s sustainability practices
philosophical values held by the Sinhalese community who in terms of (i) changing organisational value proposition, (ii)
represent the majority of the nation’s population operational excellence (e.g. continuous growth, global
(Thoradeniya et al. 2015). In addition, being a multicultural appearance, industry leaderships), (iii) external validity (e.g.
nation, the country provides a distinctive context to explore industry recognition, professional values, regulatory compli-
the multicultural values of Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims ances, community acceptance), (iv) technology and innov-
(Wijethilake, Munir, and Appuhami 2017). Secondly, Sri Lanka ation, and (v) community engagement and commitment.
has a long history of preserving nature. This is reflected in More specifically, all possible secondary data sources were
the popularity of Sri Lanka as a tourist destination in the used, such as website, industry outlets, professional maga-
world, mainly due to its environmental wealth such as parks zines, research publications, media releases, certifications and
and wildlife (Thoradeniya et al. 2015). Thirdly, the ancient irri- involvement in sustainability projects at community, national
gation system, archaeological artefacts and world heritage level and global level, such as commitment to the UN Global
cities in Sri Lanka show the country’s historical commitment Compact (see Appendix 1). We also ensured that the sustain-
towards sustainability (e.g. Perry, Wood, and Fernie 2015; ability practices of the case organisation went beyond regu-
Wijethilake, Munir, and Appuhami 2017). latory compliances and took a proactive approach.
The Board of Investment in Sri Lanka (2018) shows that, Accordingly, based on the initial background research of
companies in the same industry, the organisation was
(i) the Sri Lankan garment industry supplies a considerable
selected for its outstanding characteristics that provide a
portion of the world’s total garment demands, (ii) the gar-
unique context to study the proposed research question.
ment industry in Sri Lanka accounts for approximately 45 per
Similar to prior studies, the case organisation meets the crite-
cent of total export revenue (above $5.3 billion in 2019),2 (iii)
ria of being a sustainability exemplar and sustainability
it accounts for 15 per cent of Sri Lanka’s workforce,3 (iv) the
industry leader (Wu and Pagell 2011).
industry promotes the principles of the ‘garments without The case organisation, GMO,7 is a family-owned multi-
guilt’ programme, which all garment manufacturing firms national garment manufacturing group, headquartered in
must comply with,4 (v) the industry is recognised in the glo- Colombo, the capital of Sri Lanka and operating in more than
bal market for its sustainability practices,5 and (vi) it has 10 countries. Established over 30 years ago, GMO is a leading
established a competitive edge for its ethical manufacturing garment manufacturer in the country with around 90,000
in the global market, rather than using slave labour to pro- employees and more than 50 state-of-the-art facilities (UNGC
duce cheap products, apparently common to other South 2019). The organisation has experienced many structural
Asian nations6 (Ascloy, Dent, and Haan 2004; Board of changes during the period such as industry demands, policies,
Investment in Sri Lanka 2019). Therefore, the Sri Lankan gar- rules and regulations, and socio-cultural changes. GMO has
ment industry provides a convincingly appropriate been a leader in terms of changing the conventional negative
study setting. societal acceptance and perception of employees by gradually
 PRODUCTION PLANNING & CONTROL 281

embedding professionalism within the industry. By integrating for this study. GMO’s organisational structure is divided into
professionalism, ethical standards, sustainability strategies, three clusters. Access to the company was initially granted
and state of the art technologies, GMO has transformed its by one cluster’s environmental sustainability team, followed
philosophy from a ‘manufacturing’ organisation to a ‘people’ by the other two clusters. The researchers had no previous
organisation. The company caters for world-renowned brands or current professional and personal associations with the
and leading retailers including Nike, GAP, Adidas, Marks & company, ensuring that data collection was free from bias,
Spencer, Lululemon, Banana Republic, Victoria’s Secret, Calvin thereby enhancing the reliability and validity of the findings.
Klein, H&M, La Senza, VSX, Patagonia, among others. The com- Respondents were informed that the study complies with
pany is well-known and well recognised for its reputation and the university’s Human Research Ethics requirements to give
commitment towards sustainability. For instance, GMO was them confidence to express their views and opinions reason-
awarded LEED Platinum Certification for its green building, all ably freely. One of the advantages of semi-structured inter-
of its manufacturing plants are compliant with ISO 14001 views is that it enables participants to express their thoughts
environmental standards, it won the country’s best corporate and perceptions in their own terms and language. The
citizenship award for several occasions. researcher interviewed 15 senior, middle and junior level
Over the years, GMO has grown to become a USD 2 billion executives until data saturation level was reached (Eisenhardt
business, revealing its enormous potential to evolve in the glo- 1989). The average interview duration was around 50 min
bal eco-system. As a local-global conglomerate, GMO has while the maximum and minimum interview duration was
expanded and diversified its supply chain functions through between 80 and 25 min, respectively.
international joint ventures. In addition to the international Table 1 provides demographic details of the 15 partici-
joint ventures, recently, GMO introduced several own brands. pants and interviews. Subject to data saturation, these 15
GMO has been investing a considerable amount of money in interviews provided sufficient information to interpret and
R&D and sustainable innovation. Adopted from the Toyota address the research questions (Eisenhardt 1989; Yin 2009).
Production Systems, GMO has designed and implemented sys- In addition, a special interview was conducted with an exter-
tematic lean operation practices throughout the manufactur- nal green human resource consultant of the case organisa-
ing facilities. GMO has transformed its business model
tion to ensure validity of the data. The use of audio
embedded with lean and sustainable manufacturing practices
recording contributes to minimise the observer bias in case
as the core pillar of its long-term sustainability business strat-
study research (Voss, Tsikriktsis, and Frohlich 2002) and all
egies. For instance, GMO’s Communication on Progress report
but three of the participants agreed to being recorded.
(2019, p. 10) to the UN Global Compact highlights that:
Interview records derived from detailed notes of the non-
We have now consolidated our social and environmental audio recorded interviews were sent to participants for
sustainability efforts into one central sustainability structure, checking and confirmation (e.g. Eisenhardt 1989).
combining the strengths of our teams and aligning our goals to
achieve greater consistency and impact. In a time of uncertainty,
The study referred to the following sampling criteria in
we have embraced a new purpose of ‘inspiring sustainable identifying the interview participants: (i) management team
change’ to help our people find meaning during an incredibly members who are directly involved in sustainability decision
challenging time. making, (ii) representation of the three major clusters at
In line with the sustainable business strategy transform- GMO, and (iii) a minimum of two to three years of manager-
ation, GMO has set three key strategic priorities to be reached ial experience with the company. Most suitable potential par-
by 2025 (COP Report 2019). First, its ‘sustainable product’ strat- ticipants were introduced by the contact persons in each
egy aims to generate 50 percent of products from sustainable cluster. During recruitment, it was noted that sustainability
sources. Second, its ‘products made better’ strategy focuses on management within the organisation is structured by team
key areas such as transforming waste, responsible chemical activities instead of hierarchically. Members representing the
use, safeguarding water, limiting emissions, and championing sustainability teams are responsible for addressing various
biodiversity. Third, its ‘lives made better’ strategy is concerned sustainability issues throughout the group, rather than
with the human aspect, including empowering women, mean- restricting themselves to one particular cluster. In particular,
ingful employment, a workplace beyond compliance, and there were two sustainability team setups for environmental
thriving communities. In doing so, GMO has established itself and social sustainability. The interview participants repre-
as one of the leading garment exporters in the South Asian sented a diverse range of expertise, such as environmental
region. Therefore, given the nature of the case organisation engineers, energy managers, lawyers, human resource man-
such as public visibility, organisational size, nature of the sup- agers, factory managers, and sustainability managers respon-
ply chain, use of modern technology, and leading the industry, sible for waste, culture and training. The diversity of
this selected case organisation provides a relatively successful expertise and multiple viewpoints of the respondents pro-
story of a sustainable organisation. vided an insight into a wide spectrum of the sustainability
practices within the case organisation, in turn, enhancing the
validity and reliability of responses (Voss, Tsikriktsis, and
3.3. Data collection
Frohlich 2002). Interviews were organised in different loca-
The first author directly contacted GMO and clarified the tions, including corporate head office, cluster head office,
objectives of the study, and GMO’s contextual importance and manufacturing plants.
282 C. WIJETHILAKE ET AL.

Table 1. Demographic profile of the interview participants and data collection timeline.
Organisational position Organisational representation Interview duration Data collection timeline
Senior Executive 1 Cluster 1 00.50.51 (i) Initial data collection including
Senior Executive 2 Cluster 2 00.56.02 pilot study, field visits to four
Executive 1 Cluster 3 01.20.25 factories, and semi-structured
Executive 2 Cluster 1 00.47.32 interviews (from Nov 2013-Dec
Executive 3 Cluster 1 00.58.36 2014)
Executive 4 Cluster 1 00.48.51 (ii) Two-factory visits and informal
Executive 5 Cluster 2 00.32.36 discussions with managers
Junior Executive 1 Cluster 1 00.48.41 (2016–2017)
Junior Executive 2 Cluster 3 00.39.03 (iii) Field visits to two manufacturing
Junior Executive 3 Cluster 1 00.49.51 plants, informal discussions with
Junior Executive 4 Cluster 2 00.54.21 managers and participation in a
Junior Executive 5 Cluster 2 01.06.02 study workshop (Oct 2018)
Junior Executive 6 Cluster 1 00.44.17
Junior Executive 7 Cluster 1 00.26.54
Junior Executive 8 Cluster 1 00.24.25

In addition to interviews with managers, as part of the enhances reliability and validity (Voss, Tsikriktsis, and Frohlich
data collection, the first author visited six manufacturing 2002; Pagell and Wu 2009).
plants and the head office during 2014 and 2018. These
observational field visits included formal presentations, infor-
mal discussions with plant managers and staff members, 3.4. Coding and analysis
observations of the sustainability facilities and ongoing man- NVivo 10 qualitative data analysis software was used for cod-
ufacturing processes. In particular, two field tours to GMO’s ing and analysing the data. NVivo records data by categoris-
flagship green manufacturing plant, certified by the United ing in ‘nodes’, employing a systematic, inductive and
States Green Building Council’s LEED platinum ratings, pro- emergent coding process. To identify common patterns and
vided much insights about the extent to which the organisa- themes, interview transcripts and secondary documents were
tion has incorporated sustainability into its operations and analysed by referring to the categorisation and analysis of
strategies. These visits provided opportunities for the emergent themes and concepts, and the constant compari-
researcher to align rhetoric with reality and allow further son method (Silverman 2013). The broader categories of cod-
inquiries about the research phenomenon (Pagell and ing that the review of literature reveals were also considered
Wu 2009).
in the initial coding. In order to understand the context spe-
The study used a semi structured interview guide encom-
cific and unique practices, a detailed analysis was undertaken
passing key themes that formed the basis for the research
by reviewing all interview transcripts and documents (e.g.
(Eisenhardt 1989). A well-designed interview protocol enhan-
Pagell and Wu 2009). The first category represents open cod-
ces the reliability of case study research (Yin 2009). The inter-
ing. Open coding helps to organise initial data screening
view protocol was designed following a funnel model, in
into a systematic and structured flow (Strauss and Corbin
that broad view questions were asked first, followed by
1990). Accordingly, the first group of general themes related
increasingly specific questions (Yin 2009). Key themes in the
to the main codes; for example, drivers of sustainability and
interview guide (see Appendix 2) include drivers of corporate
GMO’s corporate sustainability practices. As the second stage
sustainability, corporate sustainability changes, sustainability
which is in line with the axial coding (Strauss and Corbin
culture, and organisational changes towards sustainability.
These themes reflected some theoretical relevance (Pagell 1990), themes emerged through continuous iterations by
and Wu 2009). For instance, organisational culture and comparing different organisational cultural patterns and sus-
organisational change are considered as integral components tainability practices. In this stage, specific attention was given
to proactive sustainability responses (Wijethilake, Munir, and to explore how and what sustainability practices are reflected
Appuhami 2017). While key themes were prepared in as organisational culture, and, in turn, the role of culture in
advance, the researcher attempted to remain impromptu in organisational change towards sustainability.
seeking views and opinions (Eisenhardt 1989). During the As co-authors continued the thematic analysis, new sub-
interview process, the interview guide was amended themes were derived and subsequently categorised under
depending on the interviewee’s organisational responsibility, appropriate main themes. For example, the sub-theme
background and the nature of factory setting. ‘employee empowerment’ was categorised under the
Satisfying data triangulation, data was collected from mul- ‘people-oriented changes’ theme, and formal internal proce-
tiple respondents, publicly available and internal secondary dures, such as sustainability budgeting and performance
data sources, and through the observational visits to manu- evaluations, were recognised within ‘changes towards stabil-
facturing plants (Eisenhardt 1989; Yin 2009). The secondary ity and control’. After several discussions, all members agreed
data were collected from multiple sources, including policy on one theme. In the third stage, the analysis was further
documents, publicly available documents, internal publica- continued by adopting a within-category evaluation
tions, newspapers and websites (see Appendix 1). Collecting approach where sub-themes were derived separately (Strauss
data from multiple respondents and multiple data sources and Corbin 1990). In order to ensure consistency and reliabil-
reduces bias towards single data sources, and in turn, ity among codes, co-authors concluded the main themes by
 PRODUCTION PLANNING & CONTROL 283

incorporating suitable sub-themes. The cross-coding among … external would be more on the CSR side. There is an eco-go
sub-themes facilitated the basis for the appropriate categor- beyond programme that works with schools. We identify a trainer
who is going to train their sustainability needs. Now that [CSR
isation of themes. As authors observed overlapping, random programme] has a bit more social side as well. There is a lot of
or disconnected sub-themes among the main codes, such waste management practices and career development within
themes were carefully categorised under respective codes, as sustainability for schools, etc. Internally, it comes under the
deemed appropriate. For instance, similarities were observed environmental sustainability team, which looks at reducing the
environmental impact.
among themes such as: employee empowerment and innov-
ation; training and continuous improvement; and community Another example illustrating GMO’s proactive approach in
engagement and sustainability leadership. After several com- adapting to various institutional requirements for sustainabil-
parisons, the coding was finalised by mutual agreement, ity can be seen in their COP (2012, p. 17), which highlights:
through continuous discussions and experts’ opinions. The … [GMO] maintains a proactive approach to compliance and in
consistency of the interview analysis was further supported most occasions, intra-company standards exceed legislation, third
and verified by the coding of the documentary evidence (see party affiliate requirements or customer mandates. A strong
Appendix 3). compliance and risk management framework, globally
benchmarked to that of our highest customer and international
standards/practice, ensures continuous monitoring, and year on
4. Results year development of policies and practices to support workplace
conditions in such areas as forced labour, harassment and abuse,
4.1. Sustainability practices at GMO: an overview wages and benefits, working hours, child labour, discrimination,
women’s rights, freedom of association, disciplinary framework,
The findings reveal that GMO implements various sustainabil- record keeping and documentation, health and safety,
ity practices, encompassing three perspectives of corporate ergonomics and security.
sustainability: environmental, social and economic. Among Although GMO attempts to accommodate various sustain-
their eight work streams, the company’s main focus is on ability related demands proactively to improve their effi-
environment related practices, which include waste, energy, ciency in their production process and practices and meets
water, emissions and compliance. This is also supported by the compliance requirements, the company has faced a num-
the GMO’s commitment to the Communication on Progress ber of challenges. For instance, Executive 1 described a situ-
report (COP Report 2017, p. 1), which is annually submitted ation in which one of their key customers (i.e. a renowned
to the United Nations Global Compact as: and large-scale garment retailer) demanded a production
… we realise we have an equally large responsibility towards requirement for their immediate order that would impact
both the eco-system we have created and the natural world we sustainability policies and compliance requirements of the
thrive in. Our values, core strengths and culture, drive all what organisation (e.g. to exceed the number of working hours).
we do, and we know our size and strength puts us in the best In such situations, our respondents suggested that GMO
position to make a real difference in whatever we initiate. tended to employ a compromising approach to negotiate
While GMO sets the environmental aspect of sustainability within their capacities and interests. Another challenge faced
as a priority, there are a number of programmes and initia- by GMO to implement proactive sustainability strategies
tives that focus on social and economic aspects. For instance, appears to be changing the employees’ mindset, as the
the company implements an innovative social sustainability Senior Executive 2 explains:
programme known as ‘women go beyond’ that aims to sup- We can invest money in sustainability projects. The thing is that
port the welfare of the majority of female employees. More we need to change the people’s mindset. That’s more important
than 90 per cent of GMO’s workforce are female employees, and a very difficult part. Changing cultural pattern is very difficult
and a challenging task as per my understanding. What we need
which clearly indicates that the GMO is not only meeting the to focus is we not only invest money but also invest in training
gender balance in their workforce, but also far exceeds [and] enhancing the knowledge of people. Then only our society
the public expectation and industry standards, especially in will change. Otherwise, sustainability becomes one- or two-
the context of developing countries. GMO’s COP (2011) people’s random effort.
report also indicates that the company has developed a This gives a very clear indication of the forward-looking
number of policies, procedures and practices to support sustainability mindset possessed by some of the top man-
workplace conditions, including workers’ health and safety, agement team members, which was also observed by the
working hours, protective measures against child/forced (first author) researcher during the factory visits. Many
labour among many others. In terms of economic sustainabil- respondents suggested that one of the GMO’s key strategies
ity, as well as the direct employment of 80,000 members of is to exceed the minimum sustainability requirements, for
staff, its supply chains across the countries where it operates which the organisation’s proactive approach towards sustain-
provides a large number of indirect employment opportuni- ability, including both external and internal initiatives, plays
ties, as does the high volume of foreign direct investment it a key role. However, the company’s long-standing sustain-
has brought into the country. ability practices appear to be shaped by the competing val-
All of these sustainability initiatives of GMO appear to be ues held by their large workforce. Prior studies suggest that
influenced by their proactive approach towards their external successful implementation of corporate sustainability ‘might
and internal stakeholders, as Executive 1 highlights: be largely dependent on the values and ideological
284 C. WIJETHILAKE ET AL.

underpinnings of an organisation’s culture … ’ (Linnenluecke Respondents also suggested that the sustainability
and Griffiths 2010, p. 359). Therefore, it is worth understand- budgeting process is used by the GMO as a rational deci-
ing what cultural characteristics drive corporate sustainability sion-making process based on systematic and scientific ana-
and how these competing values are embedded in GMO’s lysis, including investment appraisal techniques. Life cycle
organisational culture that helps to implement their sustain- analysis is seen as another frequently used analytical tech-
ability practices. nique that GMO undertakes to determine the viability of its
sustainability projects. According to Executive 1:

4.2. Sustainability practices focussing at stability We conduct life cycle analysis even for a small air
conditioner … we have discussions in the energy manager’s
and control forums about the modern technologies and they come and share
GMO uses various formal means and internal control mecha- with us.
nisms, such as sustainability related policies, planning, budg- In a similar vein, Senior Executive 1 highlighted the
eting, investment appraisals, life cycle assessments, importance life cycle analysis in terms of ensuring a low car-
simulations and performance evaluation systems, to improve bon footprint in the supply chain. For example, GMO has
coordination and achieve control and compliance. conducted a comparative analysis of undergarments (e.g.
Respondents suggested that the division of responsibilities bras) produced in a traditional factory and a green factory
and tasks are clearly communicated, and that individuals and
that has been certified by the LEED Platinum Certification.
teams are empowered with appropriate tools, techniques
Their analysis revealed that the bras produced at the green
and technical support to achieve organisational targets. The
factory, branded as eco-bras, recorded substantially lower
company’s internal operating procedures of sustainability
energy and carbon footprint compared to those manufac-
practices are largely supported by the Hoshin Kanri8 through
which strategies and key performance indicator (KPIs) are dis- tured in the traditional factory.
seminated throughout the group. Junior Executive 6 Finally, the performance evaluation system of GMO is
explained how Hoshin Kanri is utilised in designing and based on both formal and informal mechanisms, such as
implementing sustainability strategies: KPIs, awareness, and compliance in monitoring the progress
of sustainability practices. While GMO has designed well-
Hoshin has certain KPIs and then KPIs will lead to strategies and
established formal performance evaluation systems to evalu-
action plans. These action plans are divided into divisions where
divisions will have their own Hoshin. That is divided into the ate employees’ overall performance, the current sustainability
plants and each executive unit. … the implementation path is KPIs are not directly linked to decisions regarding rewards
there from the top to bottom, and then to the very small and promotions. Nonetheless, many participants stated that
department of a plant. internal control systems implemented within GMO have
A similar comment was made by Executive 4 regarding played an important role in organisational change towards
the importance of Hoshin in terms of achieving sustainability sustainability.
objectives and KPIs as:
Our chairman expects all the factories to be best environmentally 4.3. Sustainability practices aiming at developing
friendly and ISO 14001 certified, and every plant has to maintain human resource
all these standards.
Respondents revealed that GMO’s sustainability initiatives
In addition, the GMO uses an online management infor-
were started more than three decades ago, as the organisa-
mation system to collect and share sustainability related data
tion wanted to be a pioneer in sustainability practices. GMO
throughout the group, which is then used to support and
distinguishes itself from its industry partners in a number of
measure the KPIs, take corrective actions and ultimately,
ways. For instance, GMO does not simply focus on producing
achieve the targets. For example, as the majority of partici-
and selling quality products but also on achieving sustain-
pants revealed, top management actively observes the pro-
ability and creating value. Most importantly, many partici-
gress of sustainability projects, such as reducing water and
pants suggested that GMO treats their employees with pride
energy consumption across its factories. The company has
and takes care of them. A broad range of activities that GMO
implemented an initiative to build an online system to moni-
has engaged in involve empowering employees, employee
tor the water and electricity consumption.
involvement and participation in decision making, investing
Before making any decisions about capital-intensive proj-
in internal staff development, learning and capacity building,
ects, GMO analyses the sustainability impact, undertakes cost
renewing and upgrading human knowledge, skill formation
benefit analyses and also applies a number of project
and development, creating equal opportunities, promoting
appraisal techniques, such as net present value, payback
workplace diversity, work-life balance, promoting ethical
period, internal rate of return, and return on investment, to
business practices, health, safety and wellbeing, and social
evaluate the viability of such sustainability projects. Junior
justice. Executive 1 provided an example of how GMO has
Executive 4 provided an example:
empowered employees to achieve sustainability KPIs:
We are going to install cooling towers for chiller’s fans. That also
Employees are empowered to achieve the KPIs through whatever
has a two to three per cent savings of our total energy bill. We
the innovative ideas come up with even at the bottom level.
have budgeted and … calculated all the ROIs [return on
These innovative ideas are called the Kaizen, means
investment] and payback and everything … already we have been
improvements … . If a factory does something good, we get all
given the approval to implement the project.
 PRODUCTION PLANNING & CONTROL 285

the other factories to do it as well. I would say the motivates the rest of the employees towards corporate
empowerment is driving the culture. People are motivated. sustainability:
Unlike traditional garment manufacturing organisations, The top managers are highly committed towards the
GMO has initiated employee training and development pro- sustainability … Top management’s responsible behaviour encourages
grammes by focussing on sustainability issues and chal- team members to actively engage in sustainability practices.
lenges. Sustainability training commences during the Executive 1 further shed some light on the top manage-
employees’ induction programme at the point of their ment’s interest in sustainability:
recruitment. At this stage, employees are trained in ISO
Our managing director … always says we must not do
standards, health and safety standards, and sustainability
anything wrong.
rules and policies, as Senior Executive 2 explains:
Senior Executive 1 provides a specific example to high-
At the recruitment level we tell employees what the plant is
about, and in the induction, we tell them what we do in light the top management’s commitment and support:
sustainability, how to behave and how to use waste dustbin, how Board commitment and leadership is very important to
to select the right waste bin. We make aware of those things and implement sustainability practices. For the past three years,
we teach all of them. Rupees 2.5 million [$15,000] have allocated for sustainability only
for this division. If you consider that amount of money, actually
Furthermore, Executive 1 noted that sustainability training
somebody should be keen on it.
is not only limited to the lower level employees, but hap-
pens at all levels and is not just limited to in-house training Middle and lower level managers spoke of feeling
but also includes peer learning and participation in other empowered because of the top management leadership’s
external events: positive intent and commitment towards sustainability. At
the same time, all sustainability projects and practices need
For the ISO 14001, we have to conduct programmes and all the
employees should involve from top to bottom. And also, we have
to go through the top management team to be approved
email fliers, notice boards and all those things to educate for funding.
employees. Also, we celebrate international days like Earth Day, GMO has implemented various social sustainability initia-
Water Day, and Environment Day like those important occasions. tives to enhance the company’s reputation in general and
Executive 1 stated that the company organises various that of their employees in particular. More importantly, GMO
events to celebrate international dates and events related to has taken a proactive approach to change the perception of
sustainability and also implements a number of programmes employees working in garment manufacturing. One striking
to encourage employee engagement in sustainability practi- example is the status of the apparel women. In the begin-
ning, Juki machine operators, who were mainly women,
ces. These activities appear to be mainly aimed at creating
received low social recognition. Some parts of society even
awareness and influencing employees’ behaviour and atti-
referred to them as ‘Juki Girls’,9 with derogatory connota-
tudes, with some participants noting how employees’ mind-
tions. Executive 3 illustrates the GMO’s genuine intention to
sets have changed as a result. For example, Executive
change this:
4 stated:
When [founders] established the business, you know how the
People pollute less, which is very important. They take the idea
apparel ladies were treated in the 1980s. … they wanted to
home as well. Then kids learn those practices. We organise
change the whole perspective. They wanted to make it a
sustainability-related competitions which give special recognition
professional organisation. They hired professionals like engineers
to employees, even on the Earth Hour we had a competition to
and finance professional and all those who have degrees … Then
guide people.
‘Juki Ladies’ became ‘Team Members’.
Some participants also suggested that their ideas are val- GMO’s vision, top management support, the company’s
ued by the GMO and that they are also encouraged to par- programs targeting their employees, such as training and
ticipate in sustainability related projects, as the following development, empowerment, and employees’ involvement in
quote from Junior Executive 6 illustrates: sustainability practices and their participation in decision
Top management gives the freedom to act with our own ideas. making, are all seen as factors that contribute to changing
employees’ mindset, which ultimately helps the company to
Executive 4 provided a similar example of employees’ pro-
successfully implement sustainability initiatives throughout
active involvement, referring to some events related to
the group.
cleaning the [ABC] National Park and also contributing to
other community projects:
That’s not initiated from the central sustainability committee, but 4.4. Sustainability practices aiming at enhancing
it was initiated by the plant management and staff … efficiency and productivity
Top management support was found to be another main GMO’s sustainability practices appear to be aimed at enhanc-
contributing factor towards GMO’s proactive sustainability ing their efficiency, reducing cost and increasing operational
practices. Almost all the respondents emphasised that the efficiency. GMO considers that sharing accurate and timely
top-level leadership is the main driving force behind the sustainability related information is key for achieving such
implementation of sustainability practices at GMO. Senior sustainability related goals (i.e. improving efficiency and
Executive 2 suggested that top management’s vision productivity and reducing cost). The company uses both
286 C. WIJETHILAKE ET AL.

formal and informal channels to disseminate sustainability large-scale projects include electricity, water, major capital
information within the group, which include notice boards, investments and long-term strategies. Junior Executive 4
wallpapers, suggestion boxes to get feedback, internal news- stated that such practices have become the norm within the
letters, management information systems websites, company and that it pays close attention to the sustainability
‘Sustainability Insights’ intranet site, news archives and media aspects of each and every project that it undertakes.
briefings. GMO’s Communication on Progress report (2011, p. Executive 1 elaborated on this fact by referring to one spe-
32) highlights the objectives of the launch of the cific example when GMO decided to purchase an
Sustainability Insights project to share information: energy chiller:
As a step to make all at [GMO] more aware and vigilant, an … they [consultants] come to factory visits, discuss, analyse
intranet site known as ‘Sustainability Insights’ was launched in things and sometimes they do simulations and evaluate different
August 2011 where the environmental sustainability steering quotations as well. Then they say if you use this chiller, this may
team updated progress and the latest happenings in the group; have this much of payback and savings. They do analysis and
working towards connectivity, collaboration and an inclusive give us a report on different options and based on that we select
culture. Annually the sustainability steering team organises a the supplier. Depending on the energy savings as well as the
sustainability forum where employees who are driving the cost, we have to balance and then we buy the machine.
initiative across the group join together to share the
developments and the proceedings of the year in each of their All of this indicates that while the day-to-day sustainabil-
divisions and the way forward. ity practices are mainly driven by organisational cultural val-
ues, large-scale capital-intensive projects often involve
GMO not only promotes formal sustainability communica-
seeking professional and external experts’ services before
tion processes, but it has also initiated more informal ways
for employees to know about GMO’s past, current and future making centralised decisions.
sustainability practices. Moreover, employees can contribute
to this process in various ways, as Executive 2 describes: 4.5. Sustainability practices aiming at growth and
We have also designed a wall for employees to display their resource acquisition
contributions and involvements to sustainability where they can
display what they are doing at home or even their ideas about The findings indicate that GMO promotes sustainable innova-
the sustainability practices of the company. From this, I think that tions, engages in continuous improvements and maintains
employees can also learn things that they have not done, but healthy relationships with its stakeholders aiming to have a
someone else has done. positive impact on long-term sustainability changes. A major-
While GMO supports employees’ ideas, encourages their ity of participants noted the fact that GMO has changed its
involvement and recognises their achievements towards sus- culture over time in order to adapt to the dynamic changes
tainability, so far, no system of direct rewards or bonuses is in the environment. In responding to sustainability changes,
in place. However, surprisingly, we could not find any evi- GMO is well mindful of the need to integrate innovation in
dence of employee resistance. In particular, Executive 4 every aspect of sustainability. In particular, it continuously
emphasised that they feel no resistance from employees in invests in state-of-the-art technologies to minimise the sus-
implementing sustainability practices. With the aim of con- tainability impact of their products and processes. Senior
tinuous improvement in its sustainability practices, Executive Executive 2 revealed how GMO engages in such sustainabil-
3 told us that the company is considering introducing a ity innovations:
reward system for complying with the proposed sustainabil- Innovation is a key and new technology is also coming up. We’ll
ity measures: see how these new technologies to use our focus and to do
better … For example, say, you need us to use [a] certain
We are also in the process of improving reward schemes for
chemical dye, which may be harmful to the environment. But
complying with sustainability targets.
now new dyes are coming out and, new technologies are
To improve efficiency and productivity by implementing coming out.
sustainability practices, organisations also need to invest in GMO possesses sophisticated systems to promote con-
large-scale plans and projects aimed at energy savings, tinuous improvements in many aspects of sustainability. For
reduced water use and waste management among many example, the company has introduced quality management
others. The findings show that GMO relies on the recommen- practices as a means of reviewing ongoing sustainability
dations of industry experts for sustainability related projects practices, as Executive 4 stated:
that require high levels of technical advice and evaluation. If
Part of our culture is the continuous improvement. Continuous
the scale and volume of the project are relatively high, the
improvements are not only in the productions. … in
company often seeks expert advice prior to commencing the sustainability also, we do continuous improvements as
project. Executive 5 emphasised how important the role of requirements are coming from our customers and suppliers or
sustainability specialists play in making such decisions: within GMO as well. We must do changes.

Like big projects, for example, for air conditioning replacements As noted by participants, GMO has focussed on maximis-
we get professional recommendations … if we don’t have ing production capacity through efficient sustainable oper-
internal, we get industry and professional experts’ advice.
ational management processes, such as supply and customer
Some other areas where GMO will seek external integration, eco-products, product standardisation and
consultants’ expert advice and recommendations in their renewable energy.
 PRODUCTION PLANNING & CONTROL 287

Apart from their focus on sustainability changes within sustainability budgeting, investment appraisal, policies and
the organisation, GMO also engages in various community procedures and performance evaluation),. A summary of key
projects, such as Eco-go Beyond, where the company focuses findings of the case study with main themes, sustainability
on training school children on how to minimise environmen- focus and supporting examples, are presented in Table 2.
tal impact and address sustainability issues. The company
has also initiated various awareness programmes and com-
munity projects for employees to encourage their engage-
5. Discussion
ment in sustainability practices. Junior Executive 7 While the garment manufacturing industry in developing
elaborated that: countries (South Asian region, in particular) has been widely
One thing is organising training programmes for people. criticised for its unsustainable operations, including human
Awareness campaigns are going on. We not only focus on the rights abuses, use of slave labour, environmental pollutions,
factory, but we also focus on the environment beyond our carbon footprint, excessive use of chemicals, etc. in the last
factory premises. We do lots of projects to improve our society. three decades (see, Ascloy, Dent, and Haan 2004; Perry et al.
For example, we also encourage employees to protect the
2015; Wijethilake, Munir, and Appuhami 2017), our findings
environment even by recycling burnt bulbs.
provide a different picture. We have provided detailed
Participants stressed that GMO’s community engagement insights on the sustainability practices obtained from a case
is not merely to avoid community pressure regarding sus- study conducted in one of the largest garment manufac-
tainability issues but to genuinely disseminate the sustain- turers in the region. The findings reveal that the GMO imple-
ability message among all stakeholders. ments environmental aspects of sustainability as a priority,
The analysis of the case study findings reveals that the but that it also focuses on social (e.g. ‘women go beyond’
GMO’s organisational change towards sustainability has been program, targeting the female workforce and having a work-
influenced by a number of factors, such as regulations, force that is more than 90 per cent female) and economic
industry and customer demands, rules, policies and proce- aspects (e.g. creating direct employment for more than
dures, and socio-cultural changes. While external drivers such 80,000 people, thousands of others in their supply chains
as compliance requirements, industry standards and custom- and their contribution to foreign direct investments in Sri
ers’ demands (including GMO’s world-renowned and multi- Lanka). The findings indicate that the company’s sustainabil-
national retailer customers, such as Nike, GAP and Adidas ity practices appear to be influenced by their proactive
among many others) appear to have some impact, the main approach towards their external and internal stakeholders,
drivers of change appear to be internal factors such as the and also by the need to meet compliance requirements.
company’s proactive approach (e.g. GMO’s vision, use of for- Examples include GMO’s engagement in a number of CSR
mal controls and integration of technology) and top man- activities, the use of ISO14001 standards, and their commit-
agement support towards sustainability. In addition, the ment to the United Nations Global Compact, for which they
company’s changed focus from a manufacturing to a ‘people’ produce and submit annual COP reports. More importantly, a
oriented organisation, employee empowerment, training and striking example worth mentioning is providing social recog-
development program, employees’ involvement in sustain- nition to the ‘Juki Girls’ and offering them a sense of inclu-
ability practices and their participation in sustainability sion in the team. These findings contradict prior studies
related decision making (e.g. innovation and experiment), are (Sinkovics, Hoque, and Sinkovics 2016) which suggest that
seen as some of the main factors contributing to changing the garment industry perceives CSR initiatives as compliance
employees’ mindset and achieving sustainability. While most requirements instead of adopting a proactive stra-
of its sustainability practices are aimed at improving oper- tegic approach.
ational efficiency and reducing cost (i.e. energy, water and Manufacturing industries have been able to improve their
waste), the company is also engaged in various community efficiency in the production and operation process, which
projects outside their organisations, such as the Eco-go enables them to produce and sell their products at a com-
Beyond program aimed at providing sustainability related petitive price. However, researchers (e.g. Lopez-Torres et al.
training to school children. All of these shows the company’s 2019) are raising questions about the negative impact of
wide range of efforts towards achieving sustainability – con- these industries on the environment and society, and the
trol versus flexibility and internal versus external focus (see garment industries are no exception. Caiado et al. (2019)
Figure 1). In particular, four different and competing cultural argue that organisations’ long-term survival not only
values are found to be the main contributing factors that depends on being competitive in the market, but also on
influence and shape the company’s sustainability practices: meeting social and environmental responsibilities. However,
people-oriented changes (e.g. empowerment, training and prior literature provides little empirical evidence on how
development and leadership); growth-oriented changes (e.g. organisations can resolve the ongoing tension inherent in
sustainability related innovations, continuous improvement having to balance social, environmental and economic goals
and community engagement); productivity and efficiency ori- (see Van der Byl and Slawinski 2015). Given the specific
ented changes (e.g. sustainability goals to improve efficiency nature of the garment manufacturing industry in developing
and productivity, open communication, decision making countries, where manufacturers play an intermediary role
based on expertise recommendation and motivation for between suppliers and customers, they are most likely
rewards); and stability and control oriented changes (e.g. inclined to face competing demands from different
288 C. WIJETHILAKE ET AL.

Table 2. Competing cultural values that enable sustainability changes.

Main themes Key findings Sustainability focus Examples/quotes
Stability and control focus  Sustainability planning, policies,  Mainly environmental and  Focus on ISO14001 certification. Executive
structures and procedures economic dimensions 4 indicates company’s intention: “ … all
 Sustainability data collection factories to be … ISO14001 certified”
 Online management  Employees are trained in ISO standards
information system  Sustainability insights
 Sustainability  Use of “compliance and risk management
investment appraisals framework … , international standards /
 Sustainability budgeting practices … , (and) development of policies
 Sustainability life cycle analysis … to support workplace conditions” (COP
 Performance evaluation systems 2012, p. 17)
Human resource development  Employee empowerment  Mainly social dimension  Family-owned business
 Sustainability training and  Also, focussed on  Manufacturing oriented focus changed to
development economic benefits ‘people’ oriented culture
 Employee involvement and  Respect and recognition to ‘Juki girls’
participation in decision making  ‘Women go beyond’ program (aimed at
 People-oriented culture supporting female employees)
 Top management support  Workers’ health, safety and wellbeing
 “Employees are empowered to achieve the
KPIs … ” (Executive 1)
Efficiency and productivity  Sustainability goals to improve  Mainly environmental and  The company’s customers include world-
enhancement efficiency and productivity economic dimensions renowned brands and leading retailers
 Open communication as a (e.g. Nike, GAP, Adidas, M & S, H & M,
medium of managing Banana Republic and Victoria’s Secret
sustainability issues and among many others)
information  Compliance with ISO 14001
 Motivation for rewards  Awarded LEED Platinum Certification
 Decision making based on  Received ‘Best citizen’ award
expertise recommendations  Reduced ‘energy and water’ consumption
(e.g. by installing cooling towers the
company expects to make “two to three
per cent savings of our total energy bill”,
according to Executive 4)
Growth and resource  Innovations and continuous  Mainly environmental dimension  Experimentation of ‘Eco bra’
acquisition improvements in responding to  Also, focussed on  “Top management gives freedom to act
sustainability challenges economic benefits with our ideas” (Junior Executive 6)
 Adaptation to change  ‘Eco go beyond’ program (aimed at
 Sustainability and providing training programs on
community engagement sustainability to the school children)
 “ … we also focus on the environment
beyond our factory premises” (Junior
Executive 7)
 Formation of two ‘Sustainability team’

stakeholders (Wijethilake, Munir, and Appuhami 2017). GMO’s Quinn and Kimberly 1984), our findings indicate that the
‘best-in-class’ exemplary approach appears quite different company’s proactive involvement in sustainability is aimed at
compared with many others operating in the industry that stability and control, growth, efficiency and productivity and
do not even meet the minimum expected standards (see people-oriented organisational change. This shows that GMO
Sinkovics, Hoque, and Sinkovics 2016). Unlike traditional gar- is focussing on competing values (e.g. control versus flexibil-
ment manufacturers, GMO focuses on producing and selling ity and internal versus external) (see, Figure 1) to achieve its
quality products, whilst achieving sustainability and creat- sustainability practices. The application of CVF enables us to
ing value. understand the role of opposite or competing organisational
This raises the question of how GMO can achieve sustain- culture values in organisational change towards sustainabil-
ability while other garment manufacturers in the developing ity. Based on our analysis of the drivers of corporate sustain-
countries are criticised for their unsustainable operations? ability, and how competing cultural values might facilitate
While some prior studies argue that organisations’ sustain- sustainability changes and its potential sustainability out-
ability practices are driven by external forces (e.g. govern- comes, this study proposes a framework for sustainable
ment regulations, industry forces, interest groups, organisational culture (see Figure 2).
professional bodies and stakeholder demand, etc.), others As presented in Table 2, the evidence shows that GMO’s
suggest internal factors (e.g. nature and size of business, stra- cultural changes towards sustainability are likely to be
tegic positioning, cost reduction, perceived benefit and com- reflected in different dimensions of sustainability.
petitive advantage) as key drivers. Few discuss the Interestingly, stability and control, growth oriented and prod-
importance of organisations’ response (i.e. reactive and pro- uctivity oriented cultural changes are more likely to promote
active) to sustainability (see Linnenluecke and Griffiths 2010; environmental and economic dimensions of sustainability.
Upadhaya et al. 2018; Wijethilake and Ekanayake 2018; Yet, people-oriented changes (or human resource develop-
Wijethilake and Lama 2019) (see Figure 2). Drawing on the ment) are highly embedded within social aspects of sustain-
CVF of organisational culture (Quinn and Rohrbaugh 1983; ability. As revealed in GMO’s case, while these observations
 PRODUCTION PLANNING & CONTROL 289

Corporate Organisational Corporate sustainability

Organisational culture
sustainability drivers responses performance

Reactive
External Drivers responses
- Government policies
Environmental
and regulations People oriented performance
- Industry forces changes
- Community and
interested groups
- Transnational Growth oriented
organisations Social
Proactive changes performance
- Professional bodies
responses

Internal drivers Productivity

- Nature of business oriented changes Economic
- Size of business
performance
- Strategic priorities
- Global appearance Stability/control
- Position in the oriented changes
industry

Figure 2. A framework of sustainable organisational culture.

are quite reflective of the practical phenomenon, it should Sustainability practices of GMO also appear to be aimed
be noted that there might be overlaps in other contextual at enhancing their efficiency, reducing cost and increasing
settings, such as in different industries and different coun- operational efficiency, for which the company has adopted
tries. As shown in Figure 2, we propose a general link Hoshi Kanri, Kaizen, TQM, lean manufacturing, and various
between the four competing cultural values and three other environmental management systems. In addition, its
dimensions of sustainability, regardless of the contextual dif- systematic and open communication policies facilitate an
ferences of the role of competing cultural values in enabling environment in which complex information gaps and over-
different dimensions of sustainability. laps can be resolved. While the literature often cites that
GMO has adopted a robust internal control system to communication barriers between different levels and depart-
facilitate stability and control-oriented change towards sus- ments of an organisation can be ineffective and may cause
tainability. In so doing, GMO uses sustainability related for- adverse effects (Wijethilake, Munir, and Appuhami 2017),
mal means, such as policies, planning, budgeting, GMO’s open and transparent communication approach cre-
management information systems, investment appraisals, life ates avenues for disseminating sustainability news and agen-
cycle assessments and performance evaluations, which are das effectively across all levels and departments.
mainly intended to improve working conditions, maintain Prior studies suggest that widely shared norms, values
coordination and meet compliance requirements. Its internal and social systems help employees understand how organi-
management control systems seem to play a key role in sations function (Liu et al. 2010; Dubey et al. 2019;
organisational change towards embracing corporate sustain- Wijethilake and Lama 2019), which can ultimately influence
ability (e.g. Wijethilake, Munir, and Appuhami 2017). GMO employees’ attitude towards sustainability if encouraged by
conducts sustainability life cycle analysis, sustainability budg- senior management (Linnenluecke and Griffiths 2010).
eting and sustainability investment appraisals for all of its Consistent with prior literature, top management support
major capital-intensive projects and assesses its sustainability was found to be one of the key factors contributing to
impact in greater detail. The case study shows that most of GMO’s proactive sustainability practices. While GMO’s vision,
these control systems are used as forward-looking mecha- use of formal controls, integration of technology and top
nisms (i.e. proactive) aimed at preventing sustainability issues management support may play an important role in success-
rather than detecting and correcting (i.e. reactive). These fully implementing sustainability practices, Linnenluecke and
findings appear somewhat contradictory to Perry et al. (2015) Griffiths (2010) suggest that success also largely depends on
who examined the strategic balance between ethical consid- bringing about a fundamental change in organisational cul-
erations (e.g. internal) and commercial pressure (e.g. exter- ture. Employees need to be aware of the importance of sus-
nal). Perry et al. (2015) conclude that factory managers tainability and also need a change in mindset in order to
perceive corporate social responsibility as a regulatory com- pez-
integrate sustainability into their business practices (Lo
pliance, reflecting a reactive approach. Torres et al. 2019). GMO’s approach to changing the
To achieve growth-oriented organisational change, GMO organisation towards sustainability shows that integrating
is found to be integrating innovative technologies to minim- employees’ values and attitudes in line with its organisa-
ise the impact of their production process. GMO also adopts tional vision and mission appears to be effective. GMO’s pro-
a long-term proactive orientation towards sustainability by grams set up for their employees, such as training and
extending its commitment to environment friendly practices, development, empowerment, and employees’ involvement in
adopting continuous improvement techniques, and engaging sustainability practices and their participation in decision
in the community. making, are seen as the factors that contribute to changing
290 C. WIJETHILAKE ET AL.

employee mindset and achieving sustainability. Although reactive), competing values (people, growth, productivity and
there was at the time, no direct reward system associated stability/control oriented) and the three perspectives of sus-
with achieving sustainability related targets, we found no tainability (social, environmental and economic).
evidence of employee resistance. This may be partly because The empirical findings of this study provide practicing
Sri Lankan culture is influenced by the Buddhist philosoph- managers with valuable insights. Evidence suggests that top
ical values that are shared by the majority of people (e.g. management needs to pay particular attention to embracing
Sinhalese community). The empirical findings supported by competing cultural values in a balanced approach when pur-
this unique contextual setting have allowed us to elaborate suing organisational change towards sustainability (e.g.
the application of CFV in organisational change towards Sroufe 2017). Managers also need to think of the appropriate
sustainability. balance of the four competing values of organisational cul-
The findings offer novel insights into the role of organisa- ture. In other words, cultivating a dominant cultural value is
tional culture towards organisational change and sustainabil- more likely to neglect other important areas of interest to
ity. Enhancing our understanding on the competing role of different categories of stakeholders. At the same time, man-
organisational culture in organisational change towards sus- agers need to understand that changing the existing culture
tainability (Linnenluecke and Griffiths 2010), the study con- is one of the most challenging tasks and that many organisa-
tributes to the body of literature that supports the role of tions fail (Linnenluecke and Griffiths 2010). To mitigate
organisational culture as a proactive sustainability strategy employee resistance to change in line with sustainability
(e.g. Upadhaya et al. 2018). While control-flexible and challenges, managerial efforts should be carefully analysed,
internal-external perspectives seem to reflect competing strategically planned, tactically implemented and periodically
demands (see Figure 1), our findings show that opposite cul- reviewed. Business leaders need to pay careful attention to
tural values can be intertwined, which may help support develop proper internal systems to align strategies with sus-
organisational changes towards sustainability. The findings tainability goals.
appear consistent with Dubey et al. (2017) who argue that to While this study provides an in-depth analysis of the role
achieve sustainable performance, organisations need to of organisational culture in organisational change towards
embrace a hybrid orientation (a mix of flexibility and con- sustainability, the following limitations should be borne in
trol). However, our findings appear somewhat different from mind. Firstly, the concepts of organisational culture, organisa-
a recent study (e.g. Dubey et al. 2019) that could find no evi- tional change, and corporate sustainability are broad and
dence of the moderating role of organisational culture (i.e. complex. While the study refers to a well-established concep-
flexibility and control dimensions) in big data and predictive tual framework (i.e. CVF), the findings may not depict a com-
analytics and social/environmental performance. prehensive view of the intended outcomes. Future studies
might use multiple or longitudinal case studies and integrate
other theoretical perspectives to explore the topic and draw
6. Conclusion and contributions a comprehensive picture of the core arguments. Secondly,
this study is subject to the inherent generalisability limita-
The study contributes to the organisational change and sus-
tions associated with case studies (Miles and Huberman
tainability literature by highlighting the role of organisational
1984; Voss, Tsikriktsis, and Frohlich 2002; Yin 2009). These
culture as a means of addressing sustainability challenges in
limitations include the fact that the data was derived from a
the highly contested arena of the garment manufacturing
single organisation in Sri Lanka, that it was limited to fifteen
industry in the South Asian context. By exploring competing
semi-structured interviews and the use of public and internal
organisational culture values in organisational change
data. In order to address these inherent limitations, we have
towards sustainability, our findings add to prior studies (e.g.
taken a number of steps to reduce the bias and ensure the
Liu et al. 2010; Linnenluecke and Griffiths 2010; Dubey et al.
reliability and validity of the data, such as selecting partici-
2017; Wijethilake, Munir, and Appuhami 2017; Upadhaya
pants from a range of backgrounds and expertise, engaging
et al. 2018; Dubey et al. 2019; Lopez-Torres et al. 2019) which
with informal discussions and conducting observation visits
provide mixed results. This study finds that an integrated
(Eisenhardt 1989; Yin 2009; Ketokivi and Choi 2014) to GMO’s
and balanced approach of competing perspectives of organ-
green manufacturing plant and the use of secondary data to
isational culture is more likely to promote organisational
triangulate the findings (Voss, Tsikriktsis, and Frohlich 2002;
change towards sustainability (Linnenluecke and Griffiths Pagell and Wu 2009). Future studies could pay attention to
2010). As discussed in the CVF, organisational ability to cross-sectional studies with a larger sample size, on the rela-
integrate sustainability practices in internal-external and con- tionship between organisational culture, organisational
trol-flexible cultural perspectives facilitates a proactive sus- change and corporate sustainability that can be generalised
tainability approach that caters for a variety of stakeholders’ more widely. The framework we propose is based on the
demands. By contrast, adopting a dominant cultural existing literature, case findings and analysis; future studies
approach might lead to a skewed focus towards environmen- could test the model to ensure its external validity.
tal, social or economic objectives. Second, by proposing a
framework for a sustainable organisational culture (see
Figure 2), this study extends the role of organisational cul- Notes
ture within and beyond the drivers of sustainability (i.e. 1. In the broader concept of ‘sustainability’, we have also included other
external vs internal), organisational response (proactive vs closely related concepts, such as ‘sustainable development’, ‘corporate
 PRODUCTION PLANNING & CONTROL 291

social responsibility’, ‘corporate responsibility’ and ‘corporate social and Bedanand Upadhaya is currently working as a lec-
environmental performance’. turer at Essex Business School, University of Essex,
2. Sri Lanka Joint Apparel Association Forum (2019) http://www.dailymirror. UK. His research focuses particularly on corporate
lk/business-news/Apparel-export-earnings-hit-record-US–5-3bn-mark/ social responsibility/sustainability, organisational cul-
273-181657
ture, management control systems and developing
3. Sri Lanka Joint Apparel Association Forum (2020) https://www. countries. Bedanand has published his research
srilankaapparel.com/sri-lanka-apparel/
papers in leading international peer-reviewed aca-
4. Sri Lanka Joint Apparel Association Forum (2019) https://www.
demic journals, including International Journal of
srilankaapparel.com/social/
Operations and Production Management, Business
5. Sri Lanka Joint Apparel Association Forum (2020) https://www.
Strategy and the Environment and Journal of Business Research. Bedanand
srilankaapparel.com/an-industry-misunderstood-sri-lankan-apparels-tale-of-
is a fellow of the Higher Education Academy, UK and a member of
resilience-global-leadership/
British Accounting and Finance Association (BAFA). During his PhD,
6. Sri Lanka Joint Apparel Association Forum (2020) https://www.
srilankaapparel.com/an-industry-misunderstood-sri-lankan-apparels-tale-of-
Bedanand has received ‘FBE HDR Academic Research Excellence Award’
resilience-global-leadership/ from the Faculty of Business and Economics, Macquarie University,
7. In compliance with the University’s Human Research Ethics Review,
Australia. Prior to joining academia, Bedanand has worked in a subsid-
pseudonyms are used to protect the confidentiality of case organisation iary of the Coca-Cola Company for over a decade.
and the respondent’s identity. The details about the case organisation
are derived from the publicly available documents and from the GMO’s
website (see. Appendix 1).
Dr Tek Lama is a Postgraduate Course Coordinator
8. ‘Hoshin Kanri is a form of corporate-wide management that combines
strategic management and operational management by linking the (Business and Accounting) and Lecturer at Victoria
achievement of top management goals with daily management at an University, Sydney campus. He received his Doctor
operation level’ (Witcher and Butterworth 2001, p. 651). of Philosophy (PhD) from Western Sydney University,
9. The term ‘Juki Girls’ used to refer to Juki Machine Operators in the Australia in 2013. Dr Lama also hold Bachelor of
garment manufacturing industry. Commerce – honours from University of Canterbury,
New Zealand and Graduate Certificate in Tertiary
Education from Victoria University, Australia. He is a
member of both Chartered Accountants - Australia
Acknowledgement
and New Zealand (CA-ANZ) and Institute of Public Accountants (IPA). Dr
Earlier versions of this paper were presented at (i) the 5th French Lama has actively been engaged in research and scholarly activities ever
Conference on Social and Environmental Accounting (CSEAR-2019) in since he started his PhD in 2009. His research manuscripts, both as a
IAE Paris, Sorbonne Business School, France and (ii) Accounting, Society sole author as well as in collaboration with other research scholars, have
and Environment (ASE-2019) research workshop at University of been published both in nationally and intentionally recognised journals
Aberdeen, UK. Authors would like to thank the participants of these two such as Pacific Accounting Review, Accounting Research Journal, Business
conferences. Chaminda Wijethilake acknowledges the support for Strategy and the Environment and Australasian Accounting Business and
research from Macquarie University Research Excellence Finance Journal to name a few. He also presented his research papers in
Scholarship programme. several conferences including British Accounting and Finance
Association (BAFA), and Accounting and Finance Association of Australia
and New Zealand (AFAANZ).
Disclosure statement
ORCID
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Chaminda Wijethilake http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1172-0738

Notes on contributors
References
Chaminda Wijethilake is a Lecturer in Accounting at Albertini, E. 2013. “Does Environmental Management Improve Financial
Essex Business School, University of Essex. Chaminda Performance? A Meta-Analytical Review.” Organization & Environment
obtained his PhD in Accounting and Corporate 26 (4): 431–457. doi:10.1177/1086026613510301.
Governance from Macquarie University, Australia. He Altay, N., A. Gunasekaran, R. Dubey, and S. J. Childe. 2018. “Agility and
holds a Master of Business Administration from Resilience as Antecedents of Supply Chain Performance under
National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan and Moderating Effects of Organizational Culture within the Humanitarian
Bachelor of Commerce (First Class Honours) degree Setting: A Dynamic Capability View.” Production Planning & Control 29
from University of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka. Chaminda is (14): 1158–1174. doi:10.1080/09537287.2018.1542174.
a Chartered Member of the Chartered Institute of Ascloy, N., K. Dent, and E. Haan. 2004. Critical Issues for Garment Industry.
Logistics and Transport (CILT), a member of British Accounting and Amsterdam: SOMO.
Finance Association (BAFA) and a Fellow of Higher Education Academy Ashkanasy, N. M., L. E. Broadfoot, and S. Falkus. 2000. “Questionnaire
(FHEA). Chaminda has published research papers in the areas of man- Measures of Organizational Culture.” In Handbook of Organizational
agement control systems, sustainability strategy, and operations man- Culture and Climate, edited by N. M. Ashkanasy, C. P. Wilderom, and
agement in journals including, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability M. F. Peterson, 131–146. London: Sage Publications.
Journal, Journal of Environmental Management, Journal of Business Ethics, Bansal, P. 2005. “Evolving Sustainably: A Longitudinal Study of Corporate
Business Strategy and the Environment, Advances in Management Sustainable Development.” Strategic Management Journal 26 (3):
Accounting, Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies, and Corporate 197–218. doi:10.1002/smj.441.
Governance. Prior to joining Essex Business School, Chaminda served as Baumgartner, R. J. 2009. “Organizational Culture and Leadership:
a senior lecturer in the Department of Management and Finance at Preconditions for the Development of a Sustainable Corporation.”
General Sir John Kotelawala Defence University, Sri Lanka. Chaminda Sustainable Development 17 (2): 102–113. doi:10.1002/sd.405.
Wijethilake is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: c.wije- Baumgartner, R. J. 2014. “Managing Corporate Sustainability and CSR: A
thilake@essex.ac.uk Conceptual Framework Combining Values, Strategies and Instruments
292 C. WIJETHILAKE ET AL.

Contributing to Sustainable Development.” Corporate Social Journal of Organizational Change Management 15 (3): 214–234. doi:10.
Responsibility and Environmental Management 21 (5): 258–271. doi:10. 1108/09534810210429273.
1002/csr.1336. Jollands, S., C. Akroyd, and N. Sawabe. 2015. “Core Values as a
Bertels, S., L. Papania, and D. Papania. 2010. Embedding Sustainability in Management Control in the Construction of Sustainable
Organizational Culture: A Systematic Review of the Body of Knowledge. Development.” Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management 12
London, Ontario: Network for Business Sustainability. (2): 127–152. doi:10.1108/QRAM-04-2015-0040.
Caiado, R. G. G., O. L. G. Quelhas, D. L. D. M. Nascimento, R. Anholon, Ketokivi, M., and T. Choi. 2014. “Renaissance of Case Research as a
and W. Leal Filho. 2019. “Towards Sustainability by Aligning Scientific Method.” Journal of Operations Management 32 (5):
Operational Programmes and Sustainable Performance Measures.” 232–240. doi:10.1016/j.jom.2014.03.004.
Production Planning & Control 30 (5–6): 413–425. doi:10.1080/ Kiron, D., G. Unruh, N. Kruschwitz, M. Reeves, H. Rubel, and A. Meyer
09537287.2018.1501817. Zum Felde. 2017. “Corporate Sustainability at a Crossroads.” MIT Sloan
Cameron, K. S., and R. E. Quinn. 2011. Diagnosing and Changing Management Review 4 (58): 1–27.
Organizational Culture: Based on the Competing Values Framework. KPMG. 2017. “The Road Ahead: The KPMG Survey of Corporate
San-Francisco: John Wiley & Sons. Responsibility Reporting 2017.” www.kpmg.com https://assets.kpmg/
Carroll, A. B., and K. M. Shabana. 2010. “The Business Case for Corporate content/dam/kpmg/be/pdf/2017/kpmg-survey-of-corporate-responsi-
Social Responsibility: A Review of Concepts, Research and Practice.” bility-reporting-2017.pdf
International Journal of Management Reviews 12 (1): 85–105. doi:10. Lincoln, Y. S. 2010. “What a Long, Strange Trip It’s Been … : Twenty–Five
1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00275.x. Years of Qualitative and New Paradigm Research.” Qualitative Inquiry
COP Report. 2011. Communication on Progress Report. New York, NY: 16 (1): 3–9. doi:10.1177/1077800409349754.
United Nation Global Compact Office. Linnenluecke, M. K., and A. Griffiths. 2010. “Corporate Sustainability and
COP Report. 2012. Communication on Progress Report. New York, NY: Organizational Culture.” Journal of World Business 45 (4): 357–366. doi:
United Nation Global Compact Office. 10.1016/j.jwb.2009.08.006.
COP Report. 2017. Communication on Progress Report. New York, NY: Liu, H., W. Ke, K. K. Wei, J. Gu, and H. Chen. 2010. “The Role of
United Nation Global Compact Office. Institutional Pressures and Organizational Culture in the Firm’s
COP Report. 2019. Communication on Progress Report. New York, NY: Intention to Adopt Internet-Enabled Supply Chain Management
United Nation Global Compact Office. Systems.” Journal of Operations Management 28 (5): 372–384. doi:10.
Creswell, J. W. 2014. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed
1016/j.jom.2009.11.010.
Methods Approaches. 4 ed. Thousand Oask, CA: Sage publications. pez-Torres, G. C., J. A. Garza-Reyes, G. Maldonado-Guzman, V. Kumar,
Lo
Dubey, R., A. Gunasekaran, S. J. Childe, T. Papadopoulos, B. Hazen, M.
L. Rocha-Lona, and A. Cherrafi. 2019. “Knowledge Management for
Giannakis, and D. Roubaud. 2017. “Examining the Effect of External
Sustainability in Operations.” Production Planning & Control 30
Pressures and Organizational Culture on Shaping Performance
(10–12): 813–826. doi:10.1080/09537287.2019.1582091.
Measurement Systems (PMS) for Sustainability Benchmarking: Some
Lozano, R. 2013. “Are Companies Planning Their Organisational Changes
Empirical Findings.” International Journal of Production Economics 193:
for Corporate Sustainability? An Analysis of Three Case Studies on
63–76. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.06.029.
Resistance to Change and Their Strategies to Overcome It.” Corporate
Dubey, R., A. Gunasekaran, S. J. Childe, T. Papadopoulos, Z. Luo, S. F.
Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 20 (5): 275–295.
Wamba, and D. Roubaud. 2019. “Can Big Data and Predictive
doi:10.1002/csr.1290.
Analytics Improve Social and Environmental Sustainability?”
Margolis, J. D., and J. P. Walsh. 2003. “Misery Loves Companies:
Technological Forecasting and Social Change 144: 534–545. doi:10.
Rethinking Social Initiatives by Business.” Administrative Science
1016/j.techfore.2017.06.020.
Quarterly 48 (2): 268–305. doi:10.2307/3556659.
Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. “Building Theories from Case Study Research.”
Marshall, D., L. McCarthy, C. Heavey, and P. McGrath. 2015.
Academy of Management Review 14 (4): 532–550. doi:10.5465/amr.
“Environmental and Social Supply Chain Management Sustainability
1989.4308385.
Elkington, J. 1998. Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Practices: Construct Development and Measurement.” Production
Century. Stony Creek, CT: New Society Publishers. Planning & Control 26 (8): 673–690. doi:10.1080/09537287.2014.
Epstein, M. J., and A. R. Buhovac. 2014. Making Sustainability Work: Best 963726.
Practices in Managing and Measuring Corporate Social, Environmental, Miles, M. B., and A. M. Huberman. 1984. Qualitative Data Analysis: A
and Economic Impacts. Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf. Sourcebook of New Methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Erthal, A., and L. Marques. 2018. “National Culture and Organisational Morsing, M., and D. Oswald. 2009. “Sustainable Leadership: Management
Culture in Lean Organisations: A Systematic Review.” Production Control Systems and Organizational Culture in Novo Nordisk A/S.”
Planning & Control 29 (8): 668–687. doi:10.1080/09537287.2018. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society
1455233. 9 (1): 83–99. doi:10.1108/14720700910936083.
Florea, L., Y. H. Cheung, and N. C. Herndon. 2013. “For All Good Reasons: Nielsen. 2015. “The Sustainable Imperative: New Insights into Consumer
Role of Values in Organizational Sustainability.” Journal of Business Expectations.” Accessed on 10 October 2020. https://www.nielsen.
Ethics 114 (3): 393–408. doi:10.1007/s10551-012-1355-x. com/ssa/en/insights/report/2015/the-sustainability-imperative-2/.
Galpin, T., J. L. Whitttington, and G. Bell. 2015. “Is Your Sustainability Ong, T. S., H. B. Magsi, and T. F. Burgess. 2019. “Organisational Culture,
Strategy Sustainable? Creating a Culture of Sustainability.” Corporate Environmental Management Control Systems, Environmental
Governance 15 (1): 1–17. doi:10.1108/CG-01-2013-0004. Performance of Pakistani Manufacturing Industry.” International
Goodman, A. 2000. “Implementing Sustainability in Service Operations at Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 68 (7):
Scandic Hotels.” Interfaces 30 (3): 202–214. doi:10.1287/inte.30.3.202. 1293–1322. doi:10.1108/IJPPM-05-2018-0187.
11653. Orlitzky, M., F. L. Schmidt, and S. L. Rynes. 2003. “Corporate Social and
Guba, E. G., and Y. S. Lincoln. 1994. “Competing Paradigms in Qualitative Financial Performance: A Meta-Analysis.” Organization Studies 24 (3):
Research.” In Handbook of Qualitative Research, edited by N. K. Denzin 403–441. doi:10.1177/0170840603024003910.
and Y. S. Lincoln, 105–117. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Pagell, M., and Z. Wu. 2009. “Building a More Complete Theory of
Hahn, T., F. Figge, J. Pinkse, and L. Preuss. 2018. “A Paradox Perspective Sustainable Supply Chain Management Using Case Studies of 10
on Corporate Sustainability: Descriptive, Instrumental, and Normative Exemplars.” Journal of Supply Chain Management 45 (2): 37–56. doi:10.
Aspects.” Journal of Business Ethics 148 (2): 235–248. doi:10.1007/ 1111/j.1745-493X.2009.03162.x.
s10551-017-3587-2. Peloza, J. 2009. “The Challenge of Measuring Financial Impacts from
Harris, L. C., and A. Crane. 2002. “The Greening of Organizational Culture: Investments in Corporate Social Performance.” Journal of Management
Management Views on the Depth, Degree and Diffusion of Change.” 35 (6): 1518–1541. doi:10.1177/0149206309335188.
 PRODUCTION PLANNING & CONTROL 293

Pennington, L. K., and E. More. 2016. “Culture’s Role in Organizational Thoradeniya, P., J. Lee, R. Tan and A. Ferreira. 2015. “Sustainability
Sustainability.” Academy of Management Proceedings 2016 (1): 15415. Reporting and the Theory of Planned Behaviour.” Accounting, Auditing
doi:10.5465/ambpp.2016.15415abstract. & Accountability Journal 28 (7): 1099–1137.
Perry, P., S. Wood, and J. Fernie. 2015. “Corporate Social Responsibility in Tortorella, G. L., D. Fettermann, F. S. Fogliatto, M. Kumar, and D. Jurburg.
Garment Sourcing Networks: Factory Management Perspectives on 2020. “Analysing the Influence of Organisational Culture and
Ethical Trade in Sri Lanka.” Journal of Business Ethics 130 (3): 737–752. Leadership Styles on the Implementation of Lean Manufacturing.”
doi:10.1007/s10551-014-2252-2. Production Planning & Control.doi:10.1080/09537287.2020.1799255.
Porter, M. E., and M. R. Kramer. 2006. “Strategy and Society: The Link UNGC. 2018. United National Global Compact. New York, NY: United
between Competitive Advantages and Corporate Social Nations.
Responsibility.” Harvard Business Review 84 (12): 78–92. Upadhaya, B., R. Munir, Y. Blount, and S. Su. 2018. “Does Organizational
Porter, M., and, and M. R. Kramer. 2011. “Creating Shared Value.” Harvard Culture Mediate the CSR–Strategy Relationship? Evidence from a
Business Review 89 (1/2): 62–77. Developing Country Nepal.” Journal of Business Research 91: 108–122.
Quinn, R. E., and J. R. Kimberly. 1984. “Paradox, Planning, and doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.05.042.
Perseverance: Guidelines for Managerial Practice.” In Managing Van der Byl, C. A., and N. Slawinski. 2015. “Embracing Tensions in
Organizational Translations, edited by J. R. Kimberly and R. E. Quinn, Corporate Sustainability: A Review of Research from Win-Wins and
295–313. Homewood, IL: Dow Jones-Irwin. Trade-Offs to Paradoxes and Beyond.” Organization & Environment 28
Quinn, R. E., and J. Rohrbaugh. 1983. “A Spatial Model of Effectiveness
(1): 54–79. doi:10.1177/1086026615575047.
Criteria: Towards a Competing Values Approach to Organizational Voss, Chris, Nikos Tsikriktsis, and Mark Frohlich. 2002. “Case Research in
Analysis.” Management Science 29 (3): 363–377. doi:10.1287/mnsc.29.3.
Operations Management.” International Journal of Operations &
363.
Production Management 22 (2): 195–219. doi:10.1108/0144357021
Schein, E. H. 1997. Organizational Culture and Leadership. 2nd ed. San
0414329.
Francisco: Jossey Bass.
WCED. 1987. “Our Common Future.” Oxford: World Commission on
Schneider, B., A. P. Brief, and R. A. Guzzo. 1996. “Creating a Climate and
Environment and Development, Oxford University Press.
Culture for Sustainable Organizational Change.” Organizational
Wijethilake, C., and A. Ekanayake. 2018. “Proactive Strategic Responses to
Dynamics 24 (4): 7–19. doi:10.1016/S0090-2616(96)90010-8.
Corporate Sustainability Pressures: A Sustainability Control System
Shibin, K. T., R. Dubey, A. Gunasekaran, Z. Luo, T. Papadopoulos, and,
Framework.” In Advances in Management Accounting, 129–173.
and D. Roubaud. 2018. “Frugal Innovation for Supply Chain
Sustainability in SMEs: Multi-Method Research Design.” Production Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited.
Wijethilake, C., and T. Lama. 2019. “Sustainability Core Values and
Planning & Control 29 (11): 908–927. doi:10.1080/09537287.2018.
1493139. Sustainability Risk Management: Moderating Effects of Top
Silverman, D. 2013. Doing Qualitative Research: A Practical Handbook. 4 Management Commitment and Stakeholder Pressure.” Business
ed. London: SAGE Publications Limited. Strategy and the Environment 28 (1): 143–154. doi:10.1002/bse.2245.
Sinkovics, N., S. F. Hoque, and R. R. Sinkovics. 2016. “Rana Plaza Collapse Wijethilake, Chaminda, Rahat Munir, and Ranjith Appuhami. 2017.
Aftermath: Are CSR Compliance and Auditing Pressures Effective?” “Strategic Responses to Institutional Pressures for Sustainability: The
Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 29 (4): 617–649. doi:10. Use of Management Control Systems.” Accounting, Auditing &
1108/AAAJ-07-2015-2141. Accountability Journal 30 (8): 1677–1710. doi:10.1108/AAAJ-07-2015-
Smith, W. K., and M. Lewis. 2011. “Toward a Theory of Paradox: A 2144.
Dynamic Equilibrium Model of Organizing.” Academy of Management Witcher, B. J., and R. Butterworth. 2001. “Hoshin Kanri: Policy
Review 36: 381–403. Management in Japanese–Owned UK Subsidiaries.” Journal of
Sroufe, R. 2017. “Integration and Organizational Change towards Management Studies 38 (5): 651–674. doi:10.1111/1467-6486.00253.
Sustainability.” Journal of Cleaner Production 162: 315–329. doi:10. Wu, Z., and M. Pagell. 2011. “Balancing Priorities: Decision-Making in
1016/j.jclepro.2017.05.180. Sustainable Supply Chain Management.” Journal of Operations
Strauss, A., and J. Corbin. 1990. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Management 29 (6): 577–590. doi:10.1016/j.jom.2010.10.001.
Theory Procedures and Techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Yin, R. K. 2009. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. London, UK:
publications. Sage Publications.
294 C. WIJETHILAKE ET AL.

Appendix 1. Summary of documented evidence 9. What are the difficulties that you encounter in implementing sus-
tainable operations?
10. How would you adopt emerging sustainability challenges?
Type of source Time frame Pages
United Nations Global Compact 2004–2018 555
Communication on
Progress Reports Appendix 3. NVivo tree coding structure
Garment Manufacturing Organisation 2011–2013 124
– Internal Magazines
Garment Manufacturing Organisation 2006–2013 295
– Sustainability Case studies 1. Sustainability practices
Garment Manufacturing Organisation: 2008–2010 20 1.1 Environmental sustainability
Eco plant reports 1.2 Social sustainability
Garment Manufacturing Organisation: 2003–2019 69 1.3 Economic sustainability
web resources and news articles 1.5 External sustainability
Confidential reports: Sustainability 2010–2013 Viewed and 1.6 Internal sustainability
planning; policies; performance extracted 2. Sustainability organisational culture
evaluations; reviews; structures;
2.1 Stability and control
processes and procedures
2.1.1 Sustainability planning, policies, structures and procedures
2.1.2 Sustainability data collection: procedures and objectives
2.1.3 Investment appraisals for sustainability:
Appendix 2. Interview guide – broader areas 2.1.4 Sustainability budgeting
of inquiry 2.1.5 Sustainability life cycle analysis
2.1.6 Performance evaluation systems
1. What are the sustainability operations at your organisation? 2.2 Cohesion and morale development
2. What motivates your company to pursue sustainable operations? 2.2.1 Employee empowerment in sustainability decision making
3. What are the drivers behind the implementation of sustain- 2.2.2 Sustainability training and development
able operations? 2.2.3 People oriented sustainability culture
4. What are the internal organisational values that drive corporate 2.2.4 Top management team sustainability leadership
sustainability? 2.3 Efficiency and productivity
5. How has corporate sustainability changed over time? 2.1.1 Decision making based on expertise recommendations
6. How does the organisation adopt sustainability changes 2.1.2 Open communication for managing sustainability issues
over time? and information
7. What are the internal tools and systems that support sustain- 2.4 Growth and resource acquisition
able operations? 2.4.1 Innovation
8. What factors limit the implementation of new sustain- 2.4.2 Continuous improvements
able operations? 2.4.3 Community engagement.