Purpose

The purpose of this study is to examine and interpret the characteristics of social responsibility in general, and business responsibility in particular, that were evident during a period in European history that was plagued by widespread social problems and change. Based on that interpretation, the authors explore the lessons those characteristics may have for social responsibility in a contemporary world that is facing similar conditions.

Design/methodology/approach

The paper presents a qualitative analysis of the proceedings of the Bienfaisance Congress held in Frankfurt in 1857, where societal leaders from different nations met to answer the question, who has responsibility for whom, and for what? The authors use grounded theory, as it is operationalized in what is known as the “Gioia template,” to conduct a structured analysis of this particular text, and to in turn produce a theoretical interpretation of how that question was answered.

Findings

The interpretation from this study is that congress participants articulated certain established dimensions of responsibility (individual, organizational, national), as well as one new dimension (international), and did so by differentiating boundaries of responsibility; in turn, the authors suggest that these dimensions and boundaries work together to form a nested system of responsibilities.

Research limitations/implications

There is limited empirical evidence available that documents the variety of responsibility-based initiatives that were being conducted during the 19th century. An analysis of the congress proceedings allows us to gain a better understanding of how the 19th-century world, particularly the upper echelons of European society, approached the question of under what conditions actors in different domains have responsibility for another. While the implications are limited by the analysis of the proceedings of one congress that was attended by elites, they do provide a snapshot of how Europe sought to articulate a system of bounded responsibilities during a time of widespread social problems and change.

Practical implications

Although the nested system of responsibilities framework that emerged from the grounded theory analysis is not applicable to all situations, it should sensitize policymakers and business leaders to the need to address social problems in a systemic way.

Originality/value

The authors both present a systems-based framework for understanding how responsibility is differentiated among actors (individual, organizational, state and international) and demonstrate how a theoretical interpretation of historical documents can be accomplished through the use of grounded theory, as operationalized through the Gioia template.

中文翻译：

---

谁回应谁，为了什么？1857 年法兰克福双年展社会责任的扎根理论分析

目的

本研究的目的是检查和解释一般社会责任的特征，特别是商业责任的特征，这些特征在欧洲历史上被广泛的社会问题和变化所困扰的时期很明显。基于这种解释，作者探讨了这些特征在面临类似条件的当代世界中可能对社会责任产生的教训。

设计/方法/方法

该论文对 1857 年在法兰克福举行的 Bienfaisance 大会的议程进行了定性分析，在会上来自不同国家的社会领导人会面回答了这个问题，谁对谁负责，为什么负责？作者使用扎根理论，因为它在所谓的“Gioia 模板”中进行了操作，对这个特定的文本进行结构化分析，并反过来对如何回答该问题进行理论解释。

发现

这项研究的解释是，大会参与者阐明了某些既定的责任维度（个人、组织、国家），以及一个新的维度（国际），并通过区分责任边界来做到这一点；反过来，作者建议这些维度和边界共同形成一个嵌套的职责系统。

研究限制/影响

可用于记录 19 世纪开展的各种基于责任的举措的经验证据有限。对大会议程的分析使我们能够更好地了解 19 世纪的世界，尤其是欧洲社会的上层，如何处理不同领域的行为者在什么条件下对另一个领域负有责任的问题。虽然其影响受限于对精英参加的一次大会的议事程序的分析，但它们确实提供了欧洲如何在社会问题和变革普遍存在的时期试图阐明一种有限责任制度的快照。

实际影响

尽管从扎根理论分析中产生的嵌套责任体系框架并不适用于所有情况，但它应该使政策制定者和商业领袖意识到以系统方式解决社会问题的必要性。

原创性/价值

作者提出了一个基于系统的框架来理解责任如何在行动者（个人、组织、国家和国际）之间区分，并展示了如何通过使用扎根理论来完成对历史文献的理论解释，如通过 Gioia模板。