The central issue of this workshop was the evaluation of how the stakeholder view of the corporation is affecting corporate strategies and the emergence of new forms of partnerships with governments and civil society.

Some empirical studies on how stakeholder engagement may foster sustainability of a company were discussed. A driving factor in the growth of corporate – civil society relations is the need by corporations to be perceived to be socially and environmentally responsible. Some research findings confirmed that managing the stakeholder context may enable a corporation to develop capabilities relevant to become more sustainable.

To date, there have been very few studies of how boundary spanning activity with civil society can be a source of innovation for corporations, although it has been noted that societal relationships create conditions that can foster firm innovation. Some academic presenters pointed out the need to give managers guidance on the conditions that can foster (or impede) successful innovation identification from stakeholders and highlight the capabilities needed to do so. This discussion led the participants into the debate on measuring benefits of socially-responsible projects, prioritising social needs and decision-making. On this issue participants discussed the social scoring practices currently used by a number of Italian bank foundations in evaluating grant projects.

The second major discussion was on the role of firms in emerging markets and developing countries. Stakeholder engagement strategies in developed economies often reflect a strong embodiment of reciprocal relationships. If managers uncritically apply such strategies in emerging markets, they could either encounter less promising responses from stakeholders or create unintended outcomes against the interest of stakeholders.

Capability-based engagement can address challenges faced by emerging markets by increasing stakeholders’ rights to education, healthcare, employment and political processes and reducing corruption, patronage, rent-seeking, and other behaviours that are against the effective functioning of the market. A study from Russia confirmed that CSR is becoming a social norm as most population and business representatives regard it as a necessary norm of business behavior.

Nevertheless, one of the points underlined was that society still lacks agreement in defining CSR. It was argued that under these conditions the leading role concerning initiating and motivating entrepreneurs for socially responsible behavior devolves to government. The results of a study from Bangladesh also suggested that the institutional entrepreneurship process in and around institutional voids will often start after institutions have been created to serve as arenas that foster the participation of different actors while breaking relationships of dependency.

The workshop also welcomed contributions about the lack of institutional articulation (among companies, public sector, civil society) which was pointed as the main obstacle for incorporation of sustainability issues in the core business strategy of some CSR-engaged brazilian companies.

Finally the discussion on corporate societal governance and a major debate surrounding corporate citizenship referred to individuals’ responsibilities. It was argued that corporate responsibilities towards the market environment are emerging, and that integrated strategies are ineffective when they neglect these responsibilities. Corporate Market Responsibility principles represent a rational integrative ethic for market strategy.

We know, however, that firms differ widely in ownership and that public and cooperative ownership exists side by side with private firms. Drawing on the general CSR debate, an interesting paper raised the question of if and how ownership influences corporate responsibility. The answer was yes but the direction and strength of influence is not obvious. This depends on how ownership is organized and the relations between owners and management (how board members are appointed, how the board and strategic management levels interact, how top management is recruited).

Finally the participants discussed the relationship between the formal components - such as structure, responsibilities, or language game – and personal values of individuals, including civic and social ones. It was argued that community feeling, shared values and social needs can be powerful motivators for corporate civic involvement, under the condition that each member of the organization is given enough influence to express them within the company. A new language game integrating both economic and civic elements might have to be developed in theory and applied in practice.

Summarising the track on “Corporate Sustainability from a social institutional perspective” provided valuable insight on the following issues:

1. How do CSR issues go through the organization, how they affect the actions of CEOs, managers, employees and other stakeholders;
2. How to integrate CSR into theory, especially regarding the chain of knowledge;
3. How CSR really affects the strategic plan of companies;
4. How CSR is included in day-by-day decisions and behaviors.

The key questions addressed were:

1. What does it mean that market is a self-regulated system concerning CSR?
2. How and by whom can be defined some roles and processes?
3. How effective are external and internal constraints?

Thanks to the international speakers coming from all over the world a number of situations outside the European paradigm were presented provoking the deep interest of participants. The diversity of contributions permitted different approaches and definitions with regard to crucial concepts such as Social Commitment and Social Responsibility to emerge.