搜索
IntroductionOnSeptember18,2015,VolkswagenshockedtheworldbecausetheU.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency’s(EPA)noticethatVolkswagen’s“cleandiesel”vehicleswerefoundtobeinviolationoftheCleanAirAct.Then,theVolkswagenemissionmanipulationscandalhasgivenrisetohotdiscussionsabouttherootreasonsofthescandal.Throughanalyzingaspectsofthe2015Volkswagenemissionstestriggingscandal,thisessayaimstousethetheoriesofcorporatesocialresponsibility(CSR)governanceandgroupthinkingtoexplaintheproblemsatVolkswagen.Then,basedontheoriesoforganizationalbehavior,thispaperwillsuggestchangestoorganizationalpracticetopreventsuchincidentsfromhappeninginthefuture.QuestionsabouttheVolkswagenscandalThereexistsaquestionatVolkswagenisthatdidmembersofthesupervisoryandmanagementboardsknowabouttheriggingofemissionstests?AccordingtoJohn(2015),the2014reportofthesupervisoryboarddeclaredthat“theSupervisoryBoardwasdirectlyinvolvedinalldecisionsoffundamentalimportancetotheGroup”.ThisquestionraisedanattentiontotheVolkswagen’sorganizationalstructure.FromtheperspectiveofCSR,Volkswagen,seeing‘sustainability’asanobjective,hasManagementBoardandSupervisoryBoard.ReportingtotheManagementBoardaretwentymembersoftheSupervisoryBoardwhoareresponsibleformonitoringmanagement,approvingimportantcorporatedecisions,andappointingthemembersoftheManagementBoard.ThefollowinganalysisfindthevaluedestructioninVolkswagencanbeattributedtothebadCSRgovernanceandgroupthinking.CSRgovernanceThetermofCSR,stemfrom1970s,standsforcorporatesocialresponsibilitywhichfocusescompany’ssustainabilitydevelopment.BusinessDictionarydefinesCSRasAcompany’ssenseofresponsibilitytowardsthecommunityandenvironment(bothecologicalandsocial)inwhichitoperates.Inmodernorganizations,awarenessofCSRisincreasingfosteredandCSRgovernancehasplayedavitalroletofacilitatesustainable,environmentalfriendlydevelopmentandreputationforcorporations.Ingeneral,theinternalorganizational1CSRstructurecanbesubdividedintotwolevels:thevertical(governance)andthehorizontal(operational)(Kathuriaetal.,2007).Additionally,CSRgovernanceinvolvesstructuresatthetopmanagementlevelandreportinglinesandwithinthecontrolofCSRstrategy.Ecclesetal.(2014)foundthatcompaniesengagedinsustainabilityaremorelikelytohaveaseparateboardcommitteeresponsibleforCSRthancompanieswithoutasustainabilitystrategy.Sincehumanresourcesisledbyaseparatedepartmentandthecorporatefunctionshouldbesupportedbyanorganizationalstructure.Attheoperationallevel,coordinationamongthedepartmentsiskeytoensuringsmoothprocessesandacoherentpursuitofcorporateobjectivestoefficientlyuseresourcesandcompetencies(Asifetal.,2013).Furthermore,Lock,I.andSeele,P.(2016)concludedthreetypesofCSRgovernanceincludingsingle-headedtype,two-headedtypeandinfusedtype.ExplanationofCSRgovernanceprobleminVolkswagenAttheverticallevel,CSRgovernancehastwotasks:strategyformulationandoversight.ItisworthnoticingwhereCSRdepartmentsareanchoredinthebodyoftheorganization.InVolkswagen,CSRgovernanceisawareofputtingCSRdepartment:SupervisoryBoardintothetoplevel.Andthestrategywillbeemphasizedmanytimes.However,“assessingtheorganizationalintegrationofCSRindailybusinesspracticesandroutinesiscriticalfordistinguishingbetweenCSR‘talk’andCSR‘walk’”(Baumann-Paulyetal.,2013,p.3).RecentstudiesshowthatplacingtheCSRdepartmentatthetopmanagementlevelcanhelpexerthighstrategicvalueandneedsandgetthesupportfromtheseniorlevelorevenchiefexecutiveofficer’s(CEO)(Pollachetal.,2012;Morganetal.,2009;ElvingandKartal,2012).Atthehorizontallevel,givenCSRdepartmentatthetopmanagement.AlthoughitisdifficulttofindthereasonwhyVolkswageninstalledtheir‘defeatdevice’tocheatthetests,wecouldassumethereason:thetypeofCSRdepartmentisnotusefulforthetopmanagers’decisionmaking.Inordertocompeteinthemarket,Volkswagendiditbesttosellcars,whichismadeeasierbymisleadingtheenvironmentaltests.AlthoughVolkswagenhasanambitiousstrategytoexploreanattractiveandenvironmentallyfriendlyrangeofautomobiles,itcanberegardedanexcuse.Volkswagenmayhavetoedtocheattocreatelowpollutingvalues,otherwisetheywerenotallowedtoexpandbiggermarketsliketheUSA(Hermans,M.,&daCruzCaria,P.(2016).Infact,attheoperationallevel,single-headedtypereportsdirectlytotheboardof2managementandputtheweightonboththestrategyimplementationandperforming(seeFIGURE1);two-headedtype,anindirectgovernancestructure,reportstothesupervisoryboardratherthantheboardofmanagementandmainlyconcentratesonmanagingmorethanstrategyformulation(seeFIGURE2);FIGURE1THESINGLEHEADEDTYPEOFCSRSTRUCTUREFIGURE2THETWO-HEADEDTYPEOFCSRSTRUCTURE3Obviously,thestructureofVolkswagenbelongstotwo-headedtypeincludingsupervisoryboard.Tobeexact,itdoesnotreporttotheboardofmanagement,butinsteadreportstothesupervisoryboard.Thustheweaknessoftwo-headedtypeCSRstructureistolosethedirectlinktotheexecutivemanagement.Anditcanleadtothatthesustainablevalueandproblems’reflectiondonotcommunicatewiththemanagementboardintime.GroupthinkGroupshaveatendencytominimizeconflictandthereforedonotexplorealternativeoptions.AccordingtoJanis(1971),groupthinkhappenswhenpowerfulpressuresareputupongroupmembersto