| dc.description.abstract | Existing research posits that decision makers use
specific cognitive frames to manage tensions in sustainability.
However, we know less about how the cognitive
frames of individuals at different levels in organization
interact and what these interactions imply for managing
sustainability tensions, such as in Bottom of the Pyramid
(BOP) projects. To address this omission, we ask do
organizational and project leaders differ in their understanding
of tensions in a BOP project, and if so, how? We
answer this question by drawing on a 5-year study of a
BOP project of a global pharmaceutical company in India.
In line with the existing research, we found three kinds of
frames—paradoxical, business case, and business—held
differently across organizational levels and over time. We
also found that the shift in frames of both project and
organizational leaders was mediated by the decision-making
horizon. The initial divergence across organizational
levels, seen in paradoxical and business frames, was
mediated by long-term decision-making horizon. However,
there was an eventual convergence toward business frames
associated with the shift from long- to shorter-term decision-making
horizons and one that led to the project’s
closure. We contribute by proposing a dynamic model of
cognitive frames in sustainability, where the research has
either alluded to top-down or bottom-up understanding. | |
