Sustainability Transition in SMEs: Stakeholder Incentives, Reporting Frameworks, and Performance Implications

Ákos Tóth-Pajor; Vivien Csapi; Amir Moradi

doi:10.2478/orga-2026-0012

.blurhash-client-img { display: none !important; }

Sustainability Transition in SMEs: Stakeholder Incentives, Reporting Frameworks, and Performance Implications

Organizacija

Volume 59 (2026): Issue 2 (May 2026)

By: Ákos Tóth-Pajor, Vivien Csapi and Amir Moradi

Open Access

|May 2026

Abstract

Background and purpose

This paper examines sustainability transition in SMEs through three interconnected lenses: stakeholder incentives, sustainability reporting, and performance implications. Building on stakeholder theory, it develops an integrative framework showing how pressures from customers, suppliers, financiers, employees, communities, and regulators shape the adoption and disclosure of sustainable business practices.

Methods

The paper combines a conceptual literature synthesis with a structured bibliometric review. The stake-holder-incentive and reporting sections synthesize theoretical and regulatory literature, while the performance section relies on a structured Scopus-based review and keyword co-occurrence analysis using VOSviewer.

Results

The conceptual synthesis shows that stakeholder pressures and value-chain information demands are key drivers of SME sustainability transition. The review of reporting frameworks indicates that, for SMEs, the regulatory centre of gravity has shifted toward proportionate and largely voluntary reporting tools, especially the VSME framework in the EU. The bibliometric analysis identifies eight clusters that can be synthesized into four broader logics: operational and circular transformation; innovation and strategic competitiveness; stakeholder-, finance-, governance-, and reporting-related infrastructures; and socio-organizational and normative embedding, suggesting that sustainability transition in SMEs is a multidimensional capability-building process.

Conclusion

Sustainability transition in SMEs should be understood not only as a compliance issue but as a stake-holder-driven strategic process. For SMEs, transparent and proportionate reporting can support access to finance and value-chain integration, while sustainable practices can improve innovation, competitiveness, and long-term performance.

References

Aboelmaged, M. (2018). The drivers of sustainable manufacturing practices in Egyptian SMEs and their impact on competitive capabilities: A PLS-SEM model. Journal of Cleaner Production, 175, 207–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.053
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Adams, C. A. (2002). Internal organisational factors influencing corporate social and ethical reporting. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15(2), 223–250. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570210418905
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Alfes, K., Shantz, A. D., Truss, C., & Soane, E. C. (2013). The link between perceived human resource management practices, engagement and employee behaviour: A moderated mediation model. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(2), 330–351. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2012.679950
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Andersen, M., & Skjoett-Larsen, T. (2009). Corporate social responsibility in global supply chains. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 14(2), 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1108/13598540910941948
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ardito, L., Raby, S., Albino, V., & Bertoldi, B. (2021). The duality of digital and environmental orientations in the context of SMEs: Implications for innovation performance. Journal of Business Research, 123, 44–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.09.022
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Auger, P., Burke, P., Devinney, T. M., & Louviere, J. J. (2003). What will consumers pay for social product features? Journal of Business Ethics, 42(3), 281–304. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022212816261
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Becker-Olsen, K. L., Cudmore, B. A., & Hill, R. P. (2006). The impact of perceived corporate social responsibility on consumer behaviour. Journal of Business Research, 59(1), 46–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2005.01.001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Beckmann, S. C., & Langer, R. (2003). Consumer citizenship: Socially responsible consumers or policy voters? European Advances in Consumer Research, 6, 190–195.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bocken, N. M. P., Short, S. W., Rana, P., & Evans, S. (2014). A literature and practice review to develop sustainable business model archetypes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 65, 42–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.039
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bos-Brouwers, H. E. J. (2010). Corporate sustainability and innovation in SMEs: Evidence of themes and activities in practice. Business Strategy and the Environment, 19(7), 417–435. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.652
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bowen, F., Newenham-Kahindi, A., & Herremans, I. (2010). When suits meet roots: The antecedents and consequences of community engagement strategy. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(2), 297–318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0360-1
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Brammer, S., He, H., & Mellahi, K. (2015). Corporate social responsibility, employee organizational identification, and creative effort. Group & Organization Management, 40(3), 323–352. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601114562246
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Campbell, J. L. (2007). Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 946–967. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.25275684
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Cantele, S., & Zardini, A. (2018). Is sustainability a competitive advantage for small businesses? An empirical analysis of possible mediators in the sustainability–financial performance relationship. Journal of Cleaner Production, 182, 166–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.016
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Carter, C. R., & Rogers, D. S. (2008). A framework of sustainable supply chain management: Moving toward new theory. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 38(5), 360–387. https://doi.org/10.1108/09600030810882816
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Cheng, B., Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2014). Corporate social responsibility and access to finance. Strategic Management Journal, 35(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2131
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Dey, P. K., Malesios, C., De, D., Budhwar, P., Chowdhury, S., & Cheffi, W. (2020). Circular economy to enhance sustainability of small and medium-sized enterprises. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(6), 2145–2169. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2492
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Dey, P. K., Malesios, C., Chowdhury, S., Saha, K., Budhwar, P., & De, D. (2022). Adoption of circular economy practices in small and medium-sized enterprises: Evidence from Europe. International Journal of Production Economics, 248, 108496. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2022.108496
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Di Fabio, A., & Kenny, M. E. (2016). Promoting well-being: The contribution of emotional intelligence. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, Article 1182. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01182
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65–91. https://doi.org/10.2307/258887
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2007). Reaping relational rewards from corporate social responsibility: The role of competitive positioning. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 24(3), 224–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2007.01.001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2010). Maximizing business returns to corporate social responsibility (CSR): The role of CSR communication. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 8–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00276.x
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Eccles, R. G., Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2014). The impact of corporate sustainability on organizational processes and performance. Management Science, 60(11), 2835–2857. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2014.1984
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
EFRAG. (2024). Voluntary Sustainability Reporting Standard for non-listed micro-, small-, and medium-sized undertakings (VSME). https://www.efrag.org/sites/default/files/sites/webpublishing/SiteAssets/VSME%20Standard.pdf
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
EFRAG. (2025). Basis for conclusions for the draft amended ESRS. https://www.efrag.org/sites/default/files/media/document/2025-07/Amended_ESRS_Exposure_Draft_July_2025_Basis_for_Conclusions.pdf
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
European Commission. (2023). Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/2772 of 31 July 2023 supplementing Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards sustainability reporting standards. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2023/2772/oj/eng
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
European Commission. (2025a). Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directives 2006/43/EC, 2013/34/EU, (EU) 2022/2464 and (EU) 2024/1760 as regards certain corporate sustainability reporting and due diligence requirements (COM/2025/81 final). https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/documents-register/detail?lang=en&ref=COM%282025%2981
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
European Commission. (2025b). Commission Recommendation (EU) 2025/1710 of 30 July 2025 on a voluntary sustainability reporting standard for small and medium-sized undertakings. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reco/2025/1710/oj/eng
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
European Union. (2025). Directive (EU) 2025/794 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 April 2025 amending Directives (EU) 2022/2464 and (EU) 2024/1760 as regards the dates from which Member States are to apply certain corporate sustainability reporting and due diligence requirements. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2025/794/oj/eng
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
European Union. (2026). Directive (EU) 2026/470 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 February 2026 amending Directives 2006/43/EC, 2013/34/EU, (EU) 2022/2464 and (EU) 2024/1760 as regards certain corporate sustainability reporting requirements and certain corporate sustainability due diligence requirements. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2026/470/oj/eng
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
EUROCHAMBRES. (2023). Access to sustainable finance for SMEs: A European survey. https://www.eurochambres.eu/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Access-to-sustainable-finance-for-SMEs.pdf
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Farndale, E., Beijer, S. E., Van Veldhoven, M. J. P. M., Kelliher, C., & Hope-Hailey, V. (2014). Work and organ-isation engagement: Aligning research and practice. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance, 1(2), 157–176. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP-03-2014-0015
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Fatemi, A., Glaum, M., & Kaiser, S. (2018). ESG performance and firm value: The moderating role of disclosure. Global Finance Journal, 38, 45–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfj.2017.03.001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Fink Babič, S., & Biloslavo, R. (2012). Corporate sustainability reporting: Opportunities and challenges. Organizacija, 45(1), 14–26.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Foerstl, K., Azadegan, A., Leppelt, T., & Hartmann, E. (2015). Drivers of supplier sustainability: Moving beyond compliance to commitment. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 51(1), 67–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12067
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stake-holder approach. Pitman.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Freeman, R. E., & Reed, D. L. (1983). Stockholders and stakeholders: A new perspective on corporate governance. California Management Review, 25(3), 88–106. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165018
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Freeman, R. E., Wicks, A. C., & Parmar, B. (2004). Stake-holder theory and “The corporate objective revisited”. Organization Science, 15(3), 364–369. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0066
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Friede, G., Busch, T., & Bassen, A. (2015). ESG and financial performance: Aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 5(4), 210–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/20430795.2015.1118917
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Giménez, C., Sierra, V., & Rodon, J. (2012). Sustainable operations: Their impact on the triple bottom line. International Journal of Production Economics, 140(1), 149–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2012.01.035
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Giménez, C., & Tachizawa, E. M. (2012). Extending sustainability to suppliers: A systematic literature review. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 17(5), 531–543. https://doi.org/10.1108/13598541211258591
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Guest, D. E. (2017). Human resource management and employee well-being: Towards a new analytic framework. Human Resource Management Journal, 27(1), 22–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-8583.12139
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hahn, R., Reimsbach, D., & Schiemann, F. (2014). Organizations, stakeholders, and sustainability: A sensemaking perspective on the adoption of sustainability-related statements. Journal of Business Ethics, 125(2), 297–316.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hillary, R. (2004). Environmental management systems and the smaller enterprise. Journal of Cleaner Production, 12(6), 561–569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2003.08.006
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hoejmose, S., Brammer, S., & Millington, A. (2013). An empirical examination of the relationship between business strategy and socially responsible supply chain management. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 33(5), 589–621. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443571311322733
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hollensbe, E. C., Khazanchi, S., & Masterson, S. S. (2008). How fairness perceptions make innovative behavior more or less stressful. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29(6), 777–794. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.499
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hörisch, J., Freeman, R. E., & Schaltegger, S. (2014). Applying stakeholder theory in sustainability management. Organization & Environment, 27(4), 328–346. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026614535786
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hunt, V., Layton, D., & Prince, S. (2015). Diversity matters. McKinsey & Company. https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-insights/why-diversity-matters
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Husted, B. W., & Allen, D. B. (2007). Strategic corporate social responsibility and value creation among large firms. Long Range Planning, 40(6), 594–610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2007.07.001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
IFRS Foundation. (2023a). IFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information. https://www.ifrs.org/issued-standards/ifrs-sustainability-standards-navigator/ifrs-s1-general-requirements/
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
IFRS Foundation. (2023b). IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures. https://www.ifrs.org/issued-standards/ifrs-sustainability-standards-navigator/ifrs-s2-climate-related-disclosures/
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Jenkins, H. (2004). A critique of conventional CSR theory: An SME perspective. Journal of General Management, 29(4), 37–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/030630700402900403
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Jensen, M. C. (2002). Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12(2), 235–256. https://doi.org/10.2307/3857812
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Jones, T. M., & Wicks, A. C. (1999). Convergent stake-holder theory. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 206–221. https://doi.org/10.2307/259075
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kay, I., Brindisi, C., & Martin, B. (2020, September 14). The stakeholder model and ESG. Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance. https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2020/09/14/the-stakeholder-model-andesg/
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kolk, A. (2008). Sustainability, accountability and corporate governance: Exploring multinationals’ reporting practices. Business Strategy and the Environment, 17(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.511
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kooij, D. T. A. M., Jansen, P. G. W., Dikkers, J. S. E., & de Lange, A. H. (2010). The influence of age on the associations between HR practices and both affective commitment and job satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(8), 1111–1136. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.666
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kot, S., Haque, A. ul, & Kozlovski, E. (2019). Strategic SCM’s mediating effect on the sustainable operations: Multinational perspective. Organizacija, 52(3), 219–235. https://doi.org/10.2478/orga-2019-0014
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Lee, M. P. (2008a). A review of the theories of corporate social responsibility: Its evolutionary path and the road ahead. International Journal of Management Reviews, 10(1), 53–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2007.00226.x
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Lee, S. (2008b). Drivers for the participation of small and medium-sized suppliers in green supply chain initiatives. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 13(3), 185–198. https://doi.org/10.1108/13598540810871235
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Lesnikova, P., & Schmidtova, J. (2020). Development of corporate sustainability in enterprises through the application of selected practices and tools. Organizacija, 53(2), 112–126. https://doi.org/10.2478/orga-2020-0008
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Lindgreen, A., Swaen, V., & Johnston, W. J. (2009). Corporate social responsibility: An empirical investigation of U.S. organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(2), 303–323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9738-8
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Lubin, D. A., & Esty, D. C. (2010). The sustainability imperative. Harvard Business Review, 88(5), 42–50. https://hbr.org/2010/05/the-sustainability-imperative
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Madrid-Guijarro, A., & Duréndez, A. (2024). Sustainable development barriers and pressures in SMEs: The mediating effect of management commitment to environmental practices. Business Strategy and the Environment, 33(2), 949–967. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3537
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Maignan, I., & Ferrell, O. C. (2004). Corporate social responsibility and marketing: An integrative framework. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 32(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070303258971
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Maletič, M., Maletič, D., Dahlgaard, J. J., Dahlgaard-Park, S. M., & Gomišček, B. (2014). The relationship between sustainability-oriented innovation practices and organizational performance: Empirical evidence from Slovenian organizations. Organizacija, 47(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.2478/orga-2014-0001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886. https://doi.org/10.2307/259247
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mohr, L. A., Webb, D. J., & Harris, K. E. (2001). Do consumers expect companies to be socially responsible? The impact of corporate social responsibility on buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 35(1), 45–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6606.2001.tb00102.x
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Noe, R. A. (2017). Employee training and development (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., ... Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Pagell, M., & Wu, Z. (2009). Building a more complete theory of sustainable supply chain management using case studies of 10 exemplars. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 45(2), 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-493X.2009.03162.x
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Peloza, J., & Shang, J. (2011). How can corporate social responsibility activities create value for stakeholders? A systematic review. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(1), 117–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-010-0213-6
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Pomering, A., & Dolnicar, S. (2009). Assessing the prerequisite of successful CSR implementation: Are consumers aware of CSR initiatives? Journal of Business Ethics, 85(S2), 285–301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9729-9
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2002). The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy. Harvard Business Review, 80(12), 56–69.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78–92.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review, 89(1–2), 62–77.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Porter, M. E., & van der Linde, C. (1995). Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(4), 97–118. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.9.4.97
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Putzer, P., & Posza, A. (2024). Transition from CSR to ESG in tourism: A bibliometric analysis. Organizacija, 57(3), 249–259. https://doi.org/10.2478/orga-2024-0018
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Revell, A., Stokes, D., & Chen, H. (2010). Small businesses and the environment: Turning over a new leaf? Business Strategy and the Environment, 19(5), 273–288. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.628
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 225–243. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.38.2.225.18838
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Securities and Exchange Commission. (2024). SEC adopts rules to enhance and standardize climate-related disclosures for investors [Press release]. https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2024-31
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Securities and Exchange Commission. (2025). SEC votes to end defense of climate disclosure rules [Press release]. https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2025-58
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Seuring, S., & Müller, M. (2008). From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(15), 1699–1710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2008.04.020
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Spence, L. J., Schmidpeter, R., & Habisch, A. (2003). Assessing social capital: Small and medium sized enterprises in Germany and the U.K. Journal of Business Ethics, 47(1), 17–29. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026284727037
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080331
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Van De Voorde, K., Paauwe, J., & Van Veldhoven, M. (2012). Employee Well-being and the HRM–Organizational Performance Relationship: A Review of Quantitative Studies. International Journal of Management Reviews, 14, 391-407. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2011.00322.x
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Wheeler, D., Colbert, B., & Freeman, R. E. (2003). Focusing on value: Reconciling corporate social responsibility, sustainability and a stakeholder approach in a network world. Journal of General Management, 28(3), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/030630700302800301
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Williams, S., & Schaefer, A. (2013). Small and medium-sized enterprises and sustainability: Managers’ values and engagement with environmental and climate change issues. Business Strategy and the Environment, 22(3), 173–186. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1740
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Wu, Z., & Pagell, M. (2011). Balancing priorities: Decision-making in sustainable supply chain management. Journal of Operations Management, 29(6), 577–590. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2010.10.001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429–472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629
Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Articles in this issue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/orga-2026-0012 | Journal eISSN: 1581-1832 | Journal ISSN: 1318-5454

Journal RSS Feed

Language: English

Page range: 183 - 200

Submitted on: Nov 4, 2024

Accepted on: Mar 5, 2026

Published on: May 27, 2026

Published by: University of Maribor

In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

Publication frequency: 4 issues per year

Keywords:

Sustainability transition,

Stakeholder incentives,

Stakeholder theory,

Sustainability reporting,

Business performance,

Innovation,

Competitiveness

Related subjects:

Business and economics,

Business management,

Management, organization, corporate governance

© 2026 Ákos Tóth-Pajor, Vivien Csapi, Amir Moradi, published by University of Maribor
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Volume 59 (2026): Issue 2 (May 2026)