Cognitions, Conflicts & Consumption: Work CSR congruence and employees’ cognitions and rationalization in the fair fashion industry

(1)

Master Program in Sustainable Management Class of 2019/2020

Master Thesis 15 ECTS

Cognitions, Conflicts & Consumption

Work CSR congruence and employees’ cognitions and rationalization in the fair fashion industry.

Uppsala Universitet - Campus Gotland Sara Fransson, Ina Müller

Supervisor:

Fredrik Sjöstrand

(2)

Abstract

Background: The world faces a consumption crisis. The fashion industry in particular is a branch in which excessive consumption patterns are present. Consumers have intentions to consume products that are more sustainable but often do not purchase accordingly; this is commonly called the CSR-consumer paradox. Also on the supply side, many fair fashion retailers have great and rigor Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) efforts, but often face challenges along the supply chain. This can lead to a gap between organizations’ CSR and sustainability intentions and practices possible.

Purpose: The purpose of this thesis is threefold. Firstly, it attempts to shed light on how organizational members approach their company’s CSR and sustainability notions and practices and how they relate to it. Secondly, the study aims to investigate other related areas where organizational members’ private cognitions are not congruent with their company’s notion. Thirdly, organizational members’ strategies to handle such incongruent cognitions and potential conflicts will be explored.

Theoretical Framework and Method: To gain a fuller understanding of the research problem this thesis will draw on qualitative data from semi-structured interviews and use Festinger’s (1957) Cognitive Dissonance Theory (CDT) as a theoretical lens Findings and Conclusions: The findings show that organizational members display a high fit between private cognitions and their companies’ understanding of sustainability and CSR and actively seek such companies. However, in terms of sustainable consumption levels and compromises on sustainability, cognitions conflict.

They can reconcile this conflict with a variety of strategies. The organizational members’ conflict in relation to sustainability practices and consumption levels can be seen as the counterpart to the CSR-consumer paradox in an organizational context.

Thus, we term this phenomenon the "CSR- Organizational Paradox”.

Keywords: Corporate Social Responsibility, Cognitive Dissonance, Fair Fashion

(3)

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund: Die Welt steckt in einer Konsumkrise und v.a. in der Modeindustrie gibt es exzessives Konsumverhalten. Konsumenten haben die Absicht nachhaltige Produkte zu konsumieren, aber kaufen oft nicht entsprechend ein; dies wird gemeinhin als das ‘CSR-consumer paradox’ bezeichnet. Auch auf der Unternehmensseite zeigen viele Einzelhändler für nachhaltige Mode ernsthafte Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Bemühungen, aber stehen dabei oft vor vielen Herausforderungen entlang der gesamten Lieferkette. Dies kann dazu führen, dass eine Lücke zwischen den eigentlichen Absichten und den tatsächlichen Praktiken eines Unternehmens im Bereich CSR und Nachhaltigkeit entsteht.

Zweck: Diese Arbeit bezweckt drei Ziele. Erstens versucht sie zu beleuchten, wie Mitglieder von Organisationen an die CSR- und Nachhaltigkeitsvorstellungen und- praktiken ihres Unternehmens herangehen und wie sie sich dazu verhalten. Zweitens zielt die Studie darauf ab, andere verwandte Bereiche zu untersuchen, in denen private Kognitionen der Organisationsmitglieder nicht mit den Vorstellungen ihres Unternehmens übereinstimmen. Drittens soll untersucht werden, wie die Organisationsmitglieder mit inkongruenten Kognitionen und möglichen Konflikten umgehen.

Theoretischer Hintergrund und Methode: Um ein umfassenderes Verständnis des Forschungsproblems zu gewinnen, wird diese Arbeit auf qualitative Daten aus halbstrukturierten Interviews zurückgreifen und Festingers (1957) ‘Kognitive Dissonanztheorie‘ (CDT) als theoretische Linse verwenden

Ergebnisse und Schlussfolgerungen: Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass die Organisationsmitglieder eine hohe Übereinstimmung zwischen privaten Kognitionen und dem Verständnis ihrer Unternehmen von Nachhaltigkeit und CSR aufweisen und sich aktiv solche Unternehmen aussuchen. Im Hinblick auf nachhaltige Konsumniveaus und Kompromisse bezüglich Nachhaltigkeit sind private Kognitionen jedoch oft im Widerspruch zu den Vorstellungen des Unternehmens. Die Organisationsmitglieder können diesen Konflikt aber durch verschiedene Strategien lösen. Der Konflikt der Organisationsmitglieder in Bezug auf Nachhaltigkeitspraktiken und Konsumniveaus kann als Gegenstück zum ‘CSR-consumer paradox’ in einem organisatorischen Kontext gesehen werden. Daher bezeichnen wir dieses Phänomen als „CSR- Organizational Paradox“.

Schlagwörter: Corporate Social Responsibility, Kognitive Dissonanztheorie, Nachhaltige Mode

(4)

Sammanfattning

Bakgrund: Världen står inför en konsumtionskris. Mode- och klädindustrin är en bransch där överdrivna konsumtionsmönster går att finna i stor utsträckning.

Konsumenter säger sig ha för avsikt att konsumera produkter som är mer hållbara men köper ofta inte dessa; detta benämns som ’CSR-consumer paradox’. Även på utbudssidan tar många hållbara modeföretag stort ansvar för sitt hållbarhetsarbete genom strikt arbete med Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), men möter ofta utmaningar längs leveranskedjan. Detta kan leda till klyftor mellan organisationernas CSR- och hållbarhetsintentioner och deras möjliga praxis.

Syfte: Syftet med denna uppsats är tredelad. För det första försöker den belysa hur organisationsmedlemmar förhåller sig och relaterar till företagets CSR- och hållbarhetsintentioner och praxis. För det andra syftar studien till att undersöka andra relaterade områden där organisationsmedlemmarnas privata kognitioner inte överensstämmer med deras företags intentioner. För det tredje kommer organisationsmedlemmarnas strategier för att hantera sådana inkongruenta kognitioner och potentiella konflikter utforskas.

Teoretiskt ramverk och metod: För att få en mer fullständig förståelse av forskningsproblemen baseras denna uppsats på kvalitativa data från semistrukturerade intervjuer och använder Festingers (1957) teori om kognitiv dissonans (CDT) som en teoretisk lins.

Resultat och slutsatser: Resultaten visar att organisationsmedlemmar uppvisar hög korrelation mellan privata kognitioner och deras företags förståelse för hållbarhet och CSR och aktivt söker sig till sådana företag. När det gäller hållbara konsumtionsnivåer och kompromisser om hållbarhet, är dessa kognitioner ofta i konflikt gentemot företagets intentioner. Organisationsmedlemmarna kan ofta lösa dessa interna konflikter med en mängd olika strategier. Organisationsmedlemmarnas konflikt i relation till hållbarhetspraxis och konsumtionsnivåer kan ses som en motsvarighet till

’CSR-consumer paradox’ ett organisatoriskt sammanhang. Därför benämner vi detta fenomen ”CSR- Organizational Paradox”.

Nyckelord: Corporate Social Responsibility, Kognitiv Dissonans, Rättvist Mode

(5)

Acknowledgements

We want to thank our supervisor and teachers for the continuous guidance and support throughout the writing process of this thesis. We also want to express our gratitude to our fellow students that have given us valuable feedback for improving this thesis. Furthermore, we would like to thank our interviewees for sharing their perspectives and setting aside time for us, in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic that also affected their businesses.

Sara Fransson

B.Sc. in Textile Management and Business Administration

Since my bachelor, I have been fighting my inner conflict towards the fashion industry. I never thought about writing yet another thesis about the topic but hope that this writing will contribute to my personal opinions about the branch.

Ina Müller

B.Sc. in International Business and B.Sc. in International Management

Working in fashion for several years, I found myself in a dilemma: my intentions to act sustainably in private life clashed with my actions at the workplace. Looking for jobs, it seems to me that even jobs in the

sustainability field could be a source of potential conflict between cognitions I hold.

This personal experience has driven and motivated me to conduct this research.

(6)

1. Introduction

In 1994, the year when the authors of this paper were born, the Earth Overshoot Day was October 10. 25 years later, in 2019, this date has moved up more than three months to July 29th, the earliest ever (Global Footprint Network, 2019). On that date - the Earth Overshoot Day - humanity has exhausted Earth’s biological resources for the entire year. That is, we demand and consume more ecological resources, such as e.g. food, timber, fibers, than the Earth’s ecosystem can regenerate in one year (Global Footprint Network, 2019). In other words: the world faces a consumption crisis. Especially the fashion industry shows excessive levels of consumption (Strähle, 2017) and has severe environmental and social impacts, polluting the environment and having poor labor standards and conditions (Strähle & Müller, 2017). The fashion industry is responsible for 10 % of the global carbon emissions which is more than all maritime shipping and flights together. Thus, the fashion industry has an immense impact on the environment and society all over the world (United Nations Environment Programme, 2018).

With sustainability topics gaining momentum in academia, business and media especially since the Earth Summit in Rio in 1992, there has, however, also formed a call for more sustainable consumption patterns on both the supply and demand side (United Nations, 1992). Sustainable, and more responsible consumption has grabbed public attention, advocating for consumption patterns that fulfil personal needs without compromising consumption potentials for present and future generations, and that reduce environmental and societal stress (Terlau & Hirsch, 2015).

On the supply side, businesses are expected to consider their societal, environmental, and economic impact- the three pillars of sustainability. This also relates to the United Nation’s (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that came into force in early 2016 (United Nations, n.d.). One of the 17 SGDs specifically addresses this issue. The SDG12 is to “ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns” (United Nations, n.d.) by 2030. As a response to the call for more sustainable consumption and production patterns companies increasingly adopt Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) practices. In today’s corporate landscape, CSR has become a common business practice. The CSR notion recognizes that companies have responsibility for their impact on society and the environment (Frynas &

Stephens, 2015). Also, some companies in the fashion industry have recognized this

(8)

responsibility and use CSR as part of their business model to enable a shift towards a more sustainable and fair fashion market (Todeschini et al., 2017). Despite the good will to make practices more sustainable, fair fashion companies still face a variety of challenges along the supply chain, especially in production and consumption.

On the demand side, consumers’ intentions to consume more ecologically and socially sustainable products have increased. Just as companies apply CSR in their businesses, responsible consumers try to take economic, ecological, and social aspects across the entire consumption chain into account, including use and disposal (Terlau & Hirsch, 2015). At the same time, however, actual purchases of such products remain low (Janssen & Vanhamme, 2015). This gap between purchase intentions and actual purchase decisions is called the CSR- consumer paradox (Janssen & Vanhamme, 2015). According to the Cognitive Dissonance Theory a person has cognitive elements about her- or himself such as past behavior, beliefs, attitudes and environments (Festinger, 1957). If these elements contradict each other, they are dissonant and create a psychological tension termed cognitive dissonance. When an individual experience such a difference, she or he is driven to reduce the dissonance (Festinger, 1957).

Whereas the CSR-consumer paradox focuses on the demand side, we will focus our research on the supply side. More specifically, this thesis will focus on employees working at retail companies within the fair fashion industry. They offer and sell consumer goods that are more sustainable than products from fast fashion retailers, but they still face various challenges in the implementation. Thus, individuals on the business side might also display a similar incongruity between attitudes and behavior, as consumers do on the demand side.

1.1 Problem Formulation

Up until now, there is still a lack of understanding how the business side experiences and relates to the phenomenon described above. That is, consumers’ gap between purchase intentions and actual behavior (i.e. CSR-consumer paradox). It is, however, reasonable to also consider the business side, especially in the fair fashion market. Although fair fashion is more sustainable in terms of social and environmental dimensions, it still depletes renewable and sometimes non-renewable resources, and oftentimes generates solid waste (Connell & Kozar, 2014). In addition, consumers buy fashion mostly due to an emotional need, rather than a rational one (Cao et al., 2014), and impulse purchasing is high among most fashion consumers (Christopher

(9)

et al., 2004). Despite great CSR ambitions of many fair fashion retailers to minimize their negative impact and contribute positively, challenges along the supply chain remain. E.g.

consumers’ irresponsible consumption patterns, overproduction due to forecasting errors, and monitoring social responsibility, among others (Strähle & Müller, 2017).

Despite the challenges that fair fashion companies face, many still display sincere CSR efforts and have strong intentions to conduct business in a more sustainable manner. This implies that although most individuals employed at fair fashion companies with genuine CSR practices might have high intentions to take decisions that benefit sustainability, they might not always be able to. According to the Cognitive Dissonance Theory, two feelings that are in conflict create an unpleasant feeling that people by nature want to reduce (Festinger, 1957). Having strong feelings and values about what is sustainable and what is not, can prove problematic at work because the workplace is often an environment in which business decisions taken might not always coincide with personal beliefs and intentions. Thus, humans on the supply side (i.e.

employees) might relate to CSR similarly in the business world, as they do in their private life.

1.2 Research Questions

The problem formulation above leads the authors to the following research questions:

1. How do organizational members approach their company’s CSR and sustainability notions and practices and how do they relate to it?

2. In which sustainability related areas are private beliefs of organizational members not congruent with their companies’ notions?

3. If cognitions that an organizational member holds are not congruent with the company’s view, which strategies do organizational members apply to handle the conflict?

In previous, there seems to be only a small focus on the CSR consumption paradox on the supply side. We aim to investigate this gap in literature and study if and how individuals on the supply side of a sustainable business experience a similar paradox. The study could contribute to a better understanding of a topic that many sustainability conscious people struggle with in the working world, including the authors. That is, balancing strong values in regard to sustainability in relation to opposite values hold by the corporation and the current economic

(10)

logic. With this thesis, we intend to show which conflicts might arise, and individuals’

motivation and rationalization to work in such jobs despite of it.

(11)

2. Literature Review

This literature review will first give an overview of the general CSR notion, its evolution, and evaluate the CSR-consumer paradox. Then, an introduction to the fair fashion industry follows.

2.1 Corporate Social Responsibility

The CSR notion started to gain momentum in the 1950s with Bowen’s discussion on social responsibilities in business, first published in 1953 (Bowen et al., 2013). Freeman’s stakeholder theory in the 1980s added to the increasing popularity of the ongoing CSR discussion. Freeman proposed that business should not only create value for shareholders, but also for stakeholders such as customers and communities (Freeman, 1984). Although conceptualization and focus have shifted, CSR is still a current research area today (Janssen & Vanhamme, 2015). Despite the plethora of research and the attention it attracted in both media and business, a widely accepted definition of the CSR concept is still lacking. This is because firstly, CSR is an umbrella term that combines a variety of concepts (Frynas & Stephens, 2015) and secondly, CSR is a dynamic term that can change over time (Carroll, 1999). However, what the various CSR concepts have in common is the recognition that companies are responsible for their impact on society and the environment (Frynas & Stephens, 2015). Making a positive contribution both to society and the natural environment constitutes the normative case for CSR. Critical voices of CSR however criticize the concept, as CSR actions are also often used as strategic business tools and/or in response to external stakeholder pressure. This business view emphasizes the substantial business benefits a company can obtain from CSR, such as reputation and goodwill, employee and customer satisfaction and loyalty, and bottom-line performance (Skarmeas & Leonidou, 2013). As such, CSR has become a common and mainstream business practice that many companies engage with (Skarmeas & Leonidou, 2013) and that is often expected by stakeholders.

2.2 The CSR-Consumer Paradox

As mentioned in the introduction, there is a gap between purchase intentions and actual purchases of sustainable products, even if consumers demand more and more sustainable products on the market (Janssen & Vanhamme, 2015). The CSR-consumer paradox refers to the phenomena where consumers have the intention to contribute to a better world through buying from a socially responsible company. However, consumers tend to not purchase from this kind of companies to the extent to which this behavior leads to a better world (Janssen &

(12)

Vanhamme, 2015). Studies found that the factors that influence consumers’ intention to buy a sustainable product are based on consumers’ social, environmental and/or ethical beliefs (Janssen & Vanhamme, 2015). Research also shows that there are various factors that have an impact on how a consumer determines CSR as a purchase criterion (Öberseder et al., 2011).

Öberseder et al. (2011) also found that price is one of the key factors that will influence purchase behavior. That is, consumers tend not to buy a sustainable product if the same product is offered to a lower price without the benefits of a sustainable one (Öberseder et al., 2011).

2.3 The Fair Fashion Industry

Sustainable fashion first surfaced in the 1960’s when consumers became aware of the negative impact of fashion, both in terms of social and environmental dimensions (Strähle & Müller, 2017). Especially poor labor conditions in order to cut costs and the extensive use of natural resources and chemicals are generally associated with the fashion industry. Figure 1 gives an overview of the most common social and environmental impacts along the clothing supply chain.

Figure 1. Clothing supply chain and associated sustainability impacts.

(Gwilt, 2014, as cited in Strähle & Müller, 2017)

This so-called ‘eco movement’ that peaked towards the end of the 1970’s was mainly driven by consumers who wanted to wear more eco-friendly clothing items. Then, trendiness or a fashionable, stylish look were not associated with more sustainable fashion (Strähle & Müller, 2017). With the Brundlandt Report in 1987 and the Rio de Janeiro Earth Summit in 1992, the call for more sustainable business practices gained further momentum. Particularly after the

Materials

• Use of pesticides &

water in cotton growing

• Genetic modification

• Fair conditions &

prices for growers

Fabric/

garment

• Use of chemicals in textile treatments

• Water &

energy use in textile process

• Fabric &

resource waste

Distribution and retail

• Treatment of suppliers

• Energy use in retail

• Packaging

Use

• Chemical detergents

• Water &

energy use- washing, drying

&ironing

Disposal

• Amount of textile waste going to landfill

• Early disposal

(13)

Rana Plaza collapse in Bangladesh in 2013¹, companies in the fashion industry have been pressured to improve their sustainability impacts in general, and working conditions in particular (Kozlowski et al., 2015). Today, ‘sustainability’ has emerged as a “megatrend”

(Mittelstaedt et al., 2014), also in the fashion industry, and an increasing number of consumers considers sustainability aspects when purchasing fashion (Strähle, 2017). Actual consumers of sustainable fashion consider ethical values when purchasing fashion, but also product durability and quality (Lundblad & Davies, 2016). Due to the rising demand for sustainable products and consumers’ pressure, many fair fashion retailers have emerged or bigger fashion retailers have incorporated CSR practices (de Abreu, 2015). However, Jung & Jin (2014) state that current sustainability issues in the fashion industry do still not put a high focus on lowering consumption levels. Also, many consumers who intend to purchase sustainable fashion still value a fashionable look and image over ethical values, and their consumption habits also act as barrier to sustainable fashion consumption (Wiederhold & Martinez, 2018). Despite sustainability being a current trend in fashion, industry experts expect the industry to transition to a much more sustainable model by 2025 (McKinsey & Company, 2019). Aside from contributing to the society and the environment, fashion retailers can also seize competitive advantage through a sustainable business practice, both in terms of supply chain enhancements and differentiation from competitors. Talking about CSR within the field of fair fashion, research shows that it could be an enabler to work with CSR within the fashion industry in order to challenge the fast fashion industry (Todeschini et al., 2017). The same explorative study also emphasizes on the fact that one of the most important factors that is needed to succeed with a sustainable business is to have commitment and engagement, and further that like-minded businesses with similar values can help each other to challenge the fast fashion industry (Todeschini et al., 2017).

Despite the momentum that sustainable fashion has gained recently, there is no common agreed on definition of ‘fast fashion’ or ‘sustainable fashion’ or other frequently used terms such as ethical fashion, slow fashion, green fashion, and eco fashion. This thesis will use the terms ‘fair fashion’ and ‘sustainable fashion’ due to the following reasons. Firstly, both terms are most commonly used by both industry experts and consumers when referring to clothing items made in a sustainable manner. Secondly, the terms capture both the environmental and social aspect

1 The collapse of the Rana Plaza garment factory in Bangladesh accounts as one of the world’s worst industrial disasters in which over 1,100 people were killed and more than 2,500 injured (Comyns &

Franklin-Johnson, 2018).

(14)

of sustainability and do not focus on one aspect only. Drawing from a variety of academic and industry sources, we have developed the following working definition: fair/sustainable fashion retailers have implemented the “triple bottom line”² of sustainability into their entire value chain so that no unnecessary environmental harm is created and people associated with value chain activities are positively impacted (KPMG, 2019; Strähle & Müller, 2017; Sustainable Apparel Coalition, n.d.). As a result, fair/sustainable fashion clothing items are produced in an environmentally and socially sustainable manner, certified by both general and textile industry specific sustainability standards.

In order to provide consumers with the ability to recognize environmentally-sound clothing items and for producers to give them credibility for their environmentally friendly production, plentiful eco-labels were developed (Choudhury, 2015). Eco-labels certify the quality of a certain product and give information on the entire lifecycle. In addition, they prove that a certain product, raw material, or company meets a particular standard in terms of ecological sustainability (Choudhury, 2015). For the textile industry, the Global Organic Textile Standard (GOTS) is the worldwide leading textile processing standard for organic fibers (Choudhury, 2015). There are also a various sustainability labels for the social aspect of sustainability. The Social Accountability standard (SA8000) for manufacturing industries in general, and the Fair Wear Foundation (FWF) specifically for the textile industry are commonly acknowledged as one of the most rigor and trustworthy standards to ensure good labor conditions throughout the supply chain (Egels-Zandén & Lindholm, 2015; Leipziger, 2017). Due to the scope of this thesis, other standards for ecological and social sustainability in the fashion industry will not be considered.

Despite the increasing popularity of fair fashion, extensive information on the fair fashion landscape, such as players, its evolution and financial figures, is lacking. This lack of information is due to several reasons which are, however, beyond the scope of this thesis. The main reason is that there is no joint understanding of what exactly the terms ‘fair fashion’ or

‘sustainable fashion’, or other frequently used terms, entail (Henninger et al., 2016; McKinsey

& Company, 2019).

2 The “triple bottom line” concept comprises the three dimensions of sustainability: society, environment and economy or people, planet, profit (Elkington, 1999).

(15)

3. Theoretical Framework

The following chapter gives an overview over the Cognitive Dissonance Theory that is used as a theoretical lens for this thesis.As we intend to study employees as individuals, rather than the organization as a whole, we use a theory from psychology instead of organizational theories.

The CSR-consumer paradox is commonly explained with help from the theory of cognitive dissonance. The Cognitive Dissonance Theory (CDT) was coined by Leon Festinger, a social psychologist. It first emerged within the field of social psychology in 1957. The first ten years, the theory had a great impact in the world of social psychology (Aronson, 1969) but it has also disseminated to other fields within social sciences. The observation that humans dislike dissonance and are driven to reduce it, is at the heart of the theory (Festinger, 1957). The theory suggests that individuals hold a variety of cognitions about themselves, that is any knowledge, opinion, value, attitude, or belief about the environment, themselves, or their behavior (Cooper, 2007; Festinger, 1957). In that sense, “[a]nything that can be thought about is grist for the dissonance mill” (Cooper, 2007, p. 6) and thus, a cognition. If two or more cognitions conflict, this situation induces cognitive discrepancy (Hinojosa et al., 2017). The following classic example which Festinger (1957) introduced is still frequently used to illustrate the theory. If a person smokes cigarette and at the same time knows that smoking is bad for his or her health, he or she experiences dissonance. This is because the two cognitions the individual holds are inconsistent with each other (Festinger, 1957). According to Festinger (1957)this conflict of cognitions can stem from different sources: (1) logical inconsistency between cognitions that follows strict logical grounds, (2) inconsistency of cognitions with cultural mores, (3), inconsistency between a specific cognition and a more general one, or (4) past experience that is inconsistent with held cognitions (Aronson, 1969; Festinger, 1957). Resulting from this cognitive discrepancy, the individual experiences an uncomfortable negative affective state:

cognitive dissonance (Festinger, 1957). The greater the discrepancy between two cognitions, the greater the magnitude of the tension state of cognitive dissonance (Cooper, 2007). The unpleasant state motivates the individual to reduce the dissonance in order to restore cognitive consistency, meaning a more pleasant state (Festinger, 1957). Dissonance reduction can occur in different ways. Individuals can change a behavioral cognitive element³, change an

3A behavioral cognitive element concerns knowledge an individual holds concerning his/her (past) behavior (Festinger, 1957).

(16)

environmental cognitive element⁴, or add a new cognitive element (Festinger, 1957). The greater the magnitude of consonant cognitions, the lower the tension state that an individual experience after dissonance reduction (Cooper, 2007). It is important to note however, that there might be situations in which an individual might not be able to reduce or remove the cognitive dissonance. This is because the behavioral and environmental conditions described above can be resistant to change (Festinger, 1957).

Although the theory roots in social psychology, it has become widely popular in a variety of other academic disciplines in the last 60 years. As the theory aims to understand important psychological processes of individuals, it has been especially employed in different fields within social sciences (Telci et al., 2011). The key fields in which scholars have used the CDT besides (social) psychology are political sciences, anthropology, and management and business. In management, the theory has been increasingly employed since the 2000s (Hinojosa et al., 2017) to study the human nature within management (Telci et al., 2011). Main themes that have been researched through the CDT lens are workplace and organizational behavior, human resource management, strategy, and entrepreneurship (Hinojosa et al., 2017). E.g.

Erdogan et al. (2004) found that teachers (i.e. employees) are more satisfied with their jobs when their own values are congruent with their organization’s values. Scholars from the business field have also picked up the CDT with a special focus on marketing issues in order to understand consumer behavior (Telci et al., 2011). In recent years, the research focus of CDT in consumer behavior has been increasingly linked to sustainability issues. Several studies showed that consumers tend to have positive attitudes towards products that are environmental friendly, sustainable and ecological but eventually do not purchase these products (Hidalgo- Baz et al., 2017; Terlau and Hirsch, 2015). This gap between purchase intentions and purchase actions is commonly referred to as the CSR-consumer paradox described in 2.2.

Since Festinger (1957) introduced the CDT in the late 1950s, a number of theoretical modifications have been added to the initial conceptualization (Cooper, 2007). That is (1) Aronson’s (1969) self-consistency model, (2) Steele's (1988) self-affirmation model, (3) Cooper & Fazio's (1984) New Look Model, (4) Stone & Cooper's (2001) self-standards model integrating all of the three previous models in one, and (5) Harmon‐Jones et al.’s (2009) action

4An environmental cognitive element concerns knowledge an individual holds concerning his/her environment (Festinger, 1957).

(17)

based model (Hinojosa et al., 2017). Table 1, to be found in the appendix, depicts the five major refinements, their core assertions and the predicted outcomes of each model. Although relevant, the specifications of each model are beyond the scope of this thesis. For the purpose of this study we will use Festinger’s (1957) original model. This is due to the following two reasons.

Firstly, the majority of researchers in the field of business and management still commonly apply the original CDT version (Hinojosa et al., 2017; Telci et al., 2011). Secondly, there is still strong support arguing for the supremacy of Festinger’s (1957) original CDT as it can account for all evidence that was found in alternative experiments (Joule & Beauvois, 1997).

Although the CDT is originally a concept from social psychology, it lends itself to the study of the business side of the CSR paradox. This is because organizations are essentially made up of humans and dissonance is a phenomenon which is commonly experienced by humans in all cultures (Lowell, 2012). Organizations, due to their very nature, can act as a source of severe dissonance (Lowell, 2012). Festinger (1957) suggests that whenever an opinion must be formed, or a decision taken -everyday tasks in an organization- dissonance is virtually inevitable. Furthermore, organizational members may hold cognitions related to their self- concept that could conflict with their organization's image (Elsbach & Bhattacharya, 2001). In the case of an organization practicing CSR potential dissonance might be even more acute.

This is because an organization’s CSR can influence employees’ attitudes, both negatively and positively (Sheel & Vohra, 2016), and thus creating potential tension.

(18)

4. Research Design & Methodology

In this chapter, the research design and method are presented, followed by the sampling method, and coding procedure.

4.1 Research Design and Method

4.1.1 Qualitative Research

In this thesis, a qualitative approach will be used to examine and analyze the data and empirical material that is collected. With the Cognitive Dissonance Theory as a base, and with previous research about the CDT within the field of management and business linked to CSR, we want to create a greater understanding of the phenomenon of CDT within sustainable business. By conducting qualitative interviews, we aim to elaborate the concepts mentioned above. This study will rather emphasize on words and figures than quantification of numbers (Bell et al., 2019) and thus, qualitative research is a better fit. In addition, the qualitative research suits a study that has a perception of the social reality as constantly shifting and is based on individuals’ creation (Bell et al., 2019).

4.1.2 Qualitative Interviews

Background information collected to create greater understanding for the relevant topics is mainly theoretical and based on peer reviewed articles, books and other secondary data. Our aim is to dig deeper into the actual mindset of employees to be able to explore interpretations regarding their handling of their companies CSR on the job and study the situation through the lens of CDT. To be able to gather such information, semi-structured interviews were held with employees at companies that were sampled for this purpose. The sampling frame for the interviewees is explained in 4.2.1 Sampling Frame. For the interview guide, we adhered to the semi-structured limitations and guidelines to have the possibility to ask open ended- and follow up questions (Bell et al., 2019). Due to the ongoing worldwide COVID-19 crisis and related safety measures non-face-to-face (i.e. online) interviews were conducted. This also suits our study since the majority of our respondents are not in close proximity to the locations we stayed at during the research process; Visby, Sweden and Aulendorf, Germany. Depending on what suited our interviewees best, we conducted the online interviews via Skype, Facetime, Google Hangouts, or Cisco Webex. Bell et al., (2019) state that it can be easier to ask sensitive questions via telephone since there is no physically present person in the room that can stress the interviewee. The same should be applicable to online interviews, although to a lesser extent.

(19)

Some of our questions might have touched on sensitive topics, i.e. personal cognitions and beliefs. Thus, online interviews were a reasonable tool to lessen the stress experienced by the interviewees.

One advantage of online interviews that we benefited from is that as it is possible to see and read body language, it can be easier to ask follow up questions and it can be more flexible compared to face-to-face interviews (Bell et al., 2019). We recorded all interviews and thereafter transcribed them where we also included how the interviewees answered upon the questions in order to fully grasp the interviewees’ feelings and underlying meaning. E.g.

nervous laughter, hesitation to answer, broad grin, etc.

4.1.2.1 Ethical considerations

Ethical aspects always have to be taken into consideration during the research process (Bell et al., 2019). Following the guidelines by Bell et al. (2019), it was of utter importance not to in direct, or in indirect ways harm the participants in our study. It was our responsibility as researchers to ensure that all our interviewees felt comfortable and gave their consent to participating in the study prior to the interview. Consequently, all interviewees were informed about the general purpose of our study, the length of the interview, the voice and/or video recording of the interview, and our anonymity handling. Another main ethical consideration was preventing deception of interviewees. According to Bell et al. (2019) researchers should not hide their aim and/or purpose of the study as it can harm the participant and potentially also his/her organization. As we wanted to dig deeper into personal cognitions and beliefs, we guaranteed our interviewees that all information would be anonymized and that nothing they say could be traced back to their company or to them personally. We could not know beforehand how our questions would be perceived, as individuals can display different understandings of sensitivity. Thereof we treated each interview individually and sensitively according to the guidelines presented by Bell et al., (2019).

(20)

4.2 Data Collection

The next paragraph takes a closer look at how relevant companies were sampled and selected and which criterion was used in this process. Then, the interview questions are introduced.

4.2.1 Sampling Frame and Background on the Subjects

For this thesis, purposive sampling was used as is usual for qualitative research (Hair et al., 2007). Purposive sampling aims at sampling participants in a way so that those sampled are relevant to the present research question (Hair et al., 2007). Thus, our research question lays the foundation for selecting suitable interviewees. The following criterion for selecting individuals was fixed and formed a priori: superior social and ecological sustainability standards. We also took a look at the companies’ statements about their mission, strategy, and targets, assessing if sustainability is at the heart of these dimensions. Table 2 shows the companies and selected statements from their websites. However, this did not serve as an additional criterion, but rather as a reinforcement of the sampling criterion. In the following, we describe the criterion in more detail and examine the companies’ match with the sampling criterion.

Superior Social and Ecological Sustainability Standards

Suitable companies are companies that exhibit superior social and ecological sustainability standards and/or certifications for the clothing items they sell or the material they use.

Specifically, we sought to elect companies that have standards that are very rigor and hard to obtain. The chosen standards are described in greater detail below. Thus, we argue that they are evidence of a company’s sincere CSR efforts. Companies that only practice CSR superficially would not be able to obtain such certificates for their products and/or production.

Rather, they usually promote their products as being sustainable, but lack the certificates to prove so. Uninformed consumers are often tricked into this so-called greenwashing marketing.

Both the production (i.e. social aspects) as well as the material used (i.e. environmental aspects) have to be certified through certain sustainability standards. In the fashion industry the GOTS certificate for newly produced cotton is highly regarded for the environmental dimension of sustainability (Almeida, 2015; Choudhury, 2015; Strähle & Kreuzhermes, 2017). For social sustainability, the SA8000 standard in general and the FWF label for the fashion industry in particular are worldwide leading, voluntary standards (Egels-Zandén & Lindholm, 2015;

Leipziger, 2017). The FWF assessed all countries within the European Union (EU) as being

(21)

low risk in terms of labor conditions (Fair Wear Foundation, 2009). Thus, we also considered companies whose production is located in the EU but are not FWF certified. Eventually, in terms of social sustainability, the sampled companies and/or their production sites used are either SA8000 or FWF certified, or their production is located in the EU. Table 3 shows the companies we interviewed and the respective standards they have for their clothing items, their fabrics used, and/or their production sites used.

Consequently, a total of 103 companies were chosen as potential interview partners. We found these companies through researching which brands fair fashion online shops, such as Avocadostore, Greenality, Zündstoff, Adisgladis, and Thrive, stocks. We contacted these 103 companies that we deemed suitable through our Uppsala University email account. 45 of them responded and eleven of these were willing to be interviewed. Ultimately, we conducted semi- structured interviews with eleven employees from eleven different companies. The achieved sampling sizes of eleven participants was appropriate as data saturation could be achieved (Bell et al, 2019). This is, after roughly eight interviews, we did not observe any new, additional themes or information.

The chosen interviewees from the suitable companies are all involved in and knowledgeable about their companies’ CSR as part of their job, although degrees may vary. As CSR is often practiced as an overarching strategy incorporated into all business departments, employees from all departments were considered, e.g. CSR, supply chain, marketing, product, sales etc.

In addition, interviews were conducted with employees from all tiers, both management as well as non-management. This is because the respective extend to which organizational members from different hierarchical levels experience a potential CSR paradox is yet fairly unclear. The degree of identification with a company and the sense of responsibility might vary among hierarchical levels which potentially affects an employee’s relation with his or her company’s CSR. Table 4 shows an overview of anonymized information on the companies and the interviewees, such as the company’s country, company size and founding year, job title, years in the job, and gender. In addition, the place, date, and time of the interviews are given.

4.2.2 Interview Questions

The interview questions are a mixture of probing, specifying and direct questions; the avoidance of leading questions is however of utter importance (Bell et al., 2019). This was considered when creating questions for the interview guide. The interview guide is created to

(22)

suit the aim of the study and it is mainly based on the theoretical framework that the study has- CSR and CDT. Follow-up questions were asked depending on how elaborate the respondents’

answers were to the main questions that have a more open character. Table 5 in the appendix depicts the interview guide with the questions grouped into key themes and respective main questions and sub-questions. Key themes are: basic information, sustainability, CSR, consumption, decision(s) (making power), and concluding questions.

4.3. Data Analysis

4.3.1 Qualitative Content Analysis

The transcripts of the conducted interviews were analyzed using Qualitative Content Analysis (QCA). The method “obtains data by observing and analyzing the content or message of written text. [...] [T]he researcher [...] identifies information content and characteristics embedded in the text” (Hair et al, 2007, p.195). As such, the method systematically describes the meaning of qualitative material (Schreier, 2012). The qualitative content analysis is a common research method to analyze qualitative data (Graneheim et al., 2017), in our case, data gathered through semi-structured interviews. The method is suitable for analyzing perceptions (Julien, 2008), e.g. different cognitions an individual can hold. It is also useful for identifying conscious and unconscious messages in textual data. That is, messages that are articulated explicitly as well as messages that are only revealed through cues (Julien, 2008). QCA is also a suitable tool for material that requires some degree of interpretation (Schreier, 2012). As participants might be hesitant to directly articulate cognitions and/or are unconscious about some cognitions they hold, content analysis can serve as a reasonable tool to uncover participants’ cognitions and interpret their statements.

As we intended to uncover and interpret the underlying meaning of the transcribed interviews, the analysis was focused on latent content (vs. manifest content) (Downe-Wamboldt, 1992 as cited in Lundman & Graneheim, 2004). This is because discomfort or uneasy and uncomfortable feelings (i.e. dissonance) (Cooper, 2007) are often not expressed directly by the participants (i.e. manifest content) but can be detected more thoroughly through interpretation of the underlying meaning (i.e. latent content).

(23)

4.3.2 Coding Procedure

For the coding and analysis, we followed the established sequence of steps for QCA described by Schreier (2012). These are: (1) deciding on research question, (2) selecting material, (3) building coding frame, (4) dividing materials into units of coding, (5) trying out coding frame, (6) evaluating and modifying coding frame, (7) main analysis, (8) interpreting and presenting findings (Schreier, 2012, p. 6). The first two steps have already been discussed in 3.2 Data Collection. Extensive information on how we progressed through steps 3-7 can be found in Table 6 in the appendix. Step 7 and 8 are considered in chapter 5. Results and 6. Analysis.

It is important to create a coding frame that can be consistently applied (Schreier, 2012). The way that consistency is created is an ongoing work throughout the work with the material. To ensure that the interpretations of the results are not based on our personal values and beliefs, it is important to adjust the tentative coding frame several times before coding the entire material with the final coding frame. Further, validity is also an aspect that must be taken into consideration when developing a coding frame for a qualitative coding analysis to ensure the quality of the study (Schreier, 2012).

(24)

5. Results

In the following chapter the results from the interviews will be presented. The results follow a clear structure, based on the coding frame (see figure 2) that emerged from the interviews.

Table 7 in the appendix depicts a matrix that shows how each interviewee responded to the respective categories. Some categories emerged that are not or only partly relevant in answering our research questions: Organizational Aspects, Non-Organizational Aspects, and Job Related Aspects. Thus, we will not elaborate these categories further, or only elaborate the subcategories that are relevant to the research questions.

Personal Cognitions

This category encompasses various cognitions that the interviewees hold related to sustainability, CSR, and consumption. We examine if the personal cognitions held coincide with the company’s view on sustainability, CSR, and consumption respectively. The specific cognitions held in regard to these three themes will not be explored in detail, as these are not relevant to the research question.

Sustainability

All interviewees stated that their personal cognitions on sustainability coincide with how their company (i.e. employer) defines and practices sustainability. E.g. interviewee A stated: “I consider myself to be in the happy position of having a complete congruence with my private convictions in my job.” When asked if personal cognitions on sustainability coincide with their company’s view, e.g. interviewee D replied “Yes, absolutely. Otherwise I don't think I'd do it either. So that's why I joined, because it works the way I imagine it to work, how economy should work.”. Interviewee I said “Yes, fortunately. I honestly think everyone who works for us has that. [...] So I would say that my personal feelings and how I organize my private everyday life are reflected in the company”. Although interviewees had different perspectives on what exactly sustainability entails, they shared some underlying principles. Interviewees understood sustainable practices as common norm and/or the only way to do business.

Examples of these statements are e.g. by interviewee C: “I think it is the only option to produce garments in this way, there is no other option.”; or interviewee H: “It shouldn't be unique that your products are manufactured sustainable, in fact it should be the norm.” In addition, consciousness was the overarching maxim of the interviewees’ understanding of the term

‘sustainability’, both for private life and businesses.

(25)

BWork Decisions Taken B1 Feel of

Personal Responsibility B11 Yes B12No

B2Need to Compromise

B21 Yes

Explanation

B211Yes B212No

B22 No

CRationalization Strategies C1Related to

Consumption C11 Don't Boost

Excessive Consumption Consumption as C12 Tool for Change

C13"Better"

Consumption Consumption as C14

Part of Human Nature C15Change System from

Within C16Fashion as

Psychological Need

C2Related to Compromises

C21Benefits Long-Term Sustainability C22Enables Better

Business Practices C23Low Bargaining

Power C24External Reasons

C25Low Severity of Compromises C26Low Frequency of

Compromises C27Companies' Need to

Make Money DInterviewees'

Feelings D1Positive

D11Joy HappinessD12 SatisfactionD13

D14Guilt Free D15Feeling of

Being Helpful D16Security

D2Mixed

D21Unease

D22Mixed Feelings

Conflicting D23 Feeling D24Split

Feelings

D25Ambi -valence

D3Negative SorrowD31 BitternessD32 FrustrationD33

FNon-Organizational Aspects

F1System Criticism F2Traditional Fashion Industry

F21Greenwashing

OverconsumptionF22

F23Neg. Impact

F3Fashion Consumer

F31Responsibility to Consume Consciously F32Fear of Greenwashing EOrganizational Aspects

E1Product Characteristics

E11Longevity

E12High Quality E13Sustainable

Material E14Carries Inspirational Message E15Fashionable E16Higher Price

Point

E2External Communication

Importance of E21 Transparency

E3Small Scale Sourcing

GJob Related Aspects

G1Wish for Job w/

Purpose/ Work Value Match

G2Past Neg. Job Experience

Figure 2. Final version of the coding frame with main categories and subcategories.

APersonal

Cognitions

A1 Sustainability:

Match w/

company's view A11Yes

A12 No

A2CSR:

Identification of company w/ term A21Yes

Match w/

company's view

A211Yes

A212 No

A22No

A3 Consumption:

Match w/ company's view A31Yes A32 No

Resolve Mismatch

A321Yes

A322Partly

A323No

(26)

CSR

The great majority of the interviewees identified their company with the term ‘CSR’. All but one of them also had personal cognitions on CSR that were in consonance with their company’s CSR definition and practice. E.g. interviewee I first elaborated her understanding of CSR in detail and then explained: “This is important to me personally and I also notice that it is lived out in the company.” There were various understandings of what CSR entails, but overall the subjects shared the common view that CSR is about creating a positive impact on the society and environment and fulfilling one’s responsibility as a company. The few that did not identify their company with the term were lateral entrants to whom the term ‘CSR’ was unknown.

However, they still shared the understanding that companies have responsibility for their impacts on the society and the environment.

Consumption

All but one interviewee had personal cognitions on consumption that did not coincide with their company’s view on consumption. As a private person they are conscious about their consumption patterns and generally tried to buy less, second hand, and organic/fair/regional.

E.g. interviewee B stated: “I very rarely feel that I need to buy new items, and if I do, I buy second-hand”; interviewee I: “So I buy a lot of second-hand clothes. I buy relatively little, actually. The more you reflect what's happening, the less you buy in general.”; or interviewee J: “For me [personally], the focus is on avoiding consumption all together”. However, they stated that their company’s intention is to increase sales and customers’ consumption. E.g.

interviewee C stated: “Of course, we need to sell products in order to stay alive, but we do balance it out.”; interviewee B said: “We are a commercial and profit driven company”, and interviewee I admitted: ”Of course we want to sell items. But then we tell the customers: better buy one good clothing item, instead of more and cheap.” As some of these quotes already suggest, all of the interviewees who experienced such a mismatch reconciled it with various rationalization strategies. These are further elaborated in the category ‘Rationalization Strategies’.

Work Decisions Taken

This category comprises two subcategories: ‘Feel of Personal Responsibility’ and ‘Need to Compromise on Sustainability’. They both derive back to questions regarding decision making power at the workplace. The answers on the question “Do you sometimes have to take decisions that are not in line with your personal understanding of sustainability/CSR?”, showed that some

(27)

interviewees experienced that sometimes, it is not possible to take decisions in a way that benefits sustainability in the most effective way. Neither to take decisions that you as an employee feel completely comfortable with. These two subcategories below, show in what way and how, employees feel personally responsible and how/if they need to compromise and explain their decisions.

Feel of Personal Responsibility

All of the interviewees answered that they feel personally responsible for decisions taken at the company that they are part of. Some of them more than others, and to different extents.

Interviewee A responded when asked if he feels personally responsible: “Yes of course, just as I have to take responsibility for my own private [...] decisions.”; and interviewee G said: “So we have to evaluate: Can we represent this? Do I feel comfortable with that?”; interviewee C:

“I see directly what we are contributing and that they are making a change when we do point it out. I feel very responsible for that.” The feeling of personal responsibility also came with a variety of positive feelings. The majority if the interviewees stated that the feeling of being personally responsible for decisions is also a driver that brings the company towards more sustainable results and solutions. One example of this, is from interviewee C where she says:

“I’m very happy to be in this position where I can contribute to a better flowing industry”.

Need to Compromise on Sustainability

All interviewees, except for one, explained how they have to compromise regarding sustainability decisions, using it as one way to justify behaviors that they do not feel comfortable with. Sometimes more consequent and sometimes more seldom. Ways of explaining how to compromise falls under the next main category below.

Rationalization Strategies

This category encompasses the ways the employees handle and explain uneasy feelings they explore when not being completely comfortable with decisions or feelings regarding their match/non-match with sustainability, CSR and consumption in relation to their workplace.

Related to Consumption

Strategies related to consumption that many of the employees used as an explanation to solve their unpleasant feeling where e.g. describing consumption as a tool for change, that their product offering and way of working contributes to “better consumption”, and that they are

(28)

able to change the system from within by operating an alternative business model. A commonly used strategy was also to compare the own [sustainable] business to fast fashion chains, such as H&M, to exemplify that their own business offers a better alternative.

Examples of this are the following quotes by interviewee G saying “Our t-shirts last longer than a cheap one from H&M” and interviewee H saying “We're offering people an alternative to a bad one”. One other rationalization strategy that was commonly used in relation to consumption was that many of the interviewees talked about consumption as a part of human nature and fashion as a psychological need. E.g. interviewee A stated: “We don't have to perceive ourselves. As long as we are in this world we will consume. […] I believe we can say goodbye to the idea of doing no harm and not consuming anything.” Interviewee K reinforced the psychological purpose of fashion: “It is simply also a good feeling [for the customer] to buy a new garment.” Further, some of the interviewees also talked about that they need to sell in order to survive as a business. The way the interviewees reasoned about this differed a bit, for example interviewee B said “We are a commercial and profit driven company” while interviewee I said “Of course we want to sell items. But then we tell the customers: better buy one good clothing item, instead of more and cheap.” and interviewee C meant “Of course, we need to sell products in order to stay alive, but we do balance it out [...]

we are very conscious of what we do, because it's also costing a lot of money”.

Related to Compromises on Sustainability

The interviewees tried to explain the compromises they had to make on sustainability in different ways. A majority of the interviewees emphasized on them being a small business, and that it comes with both advantages and disadvantages. Example of advantages were for instance that they can benefit long term-sustainability and that they can enable better business practices through collaborations with other small businesses. Disadvantages used as a way of rationalizing compromises, e.g. by saying that small companies have low bargaining power when it comes to sustainable purchasing decisions compared to bigger players within the fashion industry. Interviewee C stated the following: “We are small and we are depending on the bigger brands that have to move and that goes so incredibly slow” which goes in line with the reasoning that interviewee D presented, “Unfortunately, [sustainable practices] are not always possible because [external] processes are predetermined and it would be too costly for suppliers or salespeople to restructure the process for one customer”. Further benefits the majority of the interviewees pointed out that compromises on sustainability are both a low severity- and low frequency of compromises. E.g. interviewee I said: “I think it depends on

(29)

how serious [the compromise on sustainability] is and how often it happens.” Interviewee G shared a similar view: So 90% [sustainable practices] is fine, it's no drama. Well, I don't feel bad about that. Well, it's like I said, it's within the "plastic vs corn bag" frame.”

Interviewees’ Feelings

This category comprises all units of coding in which interviewees expressed positive, negative, or mixed emotions. Although coded separately, they will later be discussed in the context in which they were expressed as emotions are highly context dependent. Positive emotions that interviewees expressed are: joy, happiness, satisfaction, guilt free, feeling of being helpful, security, and freedom. Mixed emotions expressed are: unease, mixed feelings, conflicting feelings, split feelings, and ambivalence. Negative emotions expressed by the interviewees are:

sorrow, bitterness, frustration. The interviewees mainly experienced positive or mixed emotions; negative emotions were expressed less.

Non-Organizational Aspects

This category includes a variety of aspects that the majority of the interviewees addressed.

Most of the subcategories that emerged do not have any relevance for the research question, thus we only present results for the subcategory ‘System Criticism’.

System Criticism

Many of the interviewees referred critically to the current system, both in terms of the fashion industry, and in terms of capitalism as a hindrance power for a more alternative way of doing business. The overall message regarding the system criticism was that a change in some way is needed. E.g. interviewee B states: "I see businesses and private persons as small players in a bigger game, and the players can't be sustainable if the board game and the system is not". The discussion about system criticism was brought up by several interviewees themselves and it was not probed by the interview guide or topics in it. Since so many of the interviewees emphasized on this topic, it can be seen as relevant subcategory that could bring value to the general findings.

Job Related Aspects

Many of the companies in the world of sustainable fashion are founded and driven by engaged and enthusiastic people with strong values and beliefs, something that the interviewees confirmed. For example, interviewee D stated that “I want [my job] to be fun and that it makes

(30)

sense. That it has a personal meaning, that it contributes something positive for [me]

personally” which many of the other interviews also were talking about, which created the following sub-category.

Wish for Job with Purpose & Work Value Match

The majority of interviewees emphasized on the fact that they are working on that specific company, or that they have that specific position due to a wish for a job with purpose. That is, they want to contribute to positive change, improve sustainability and at the same time not feel guilty about what they do for work. It showed that, having that kind of work/value match, gave the interviewees a positive feeling and contributed to their willingness to work in the fashion branch, even if it was pointed out that it is a dirty branch. E.g. interviewee H said; "I'm not working for some polluting company, I'm trying to be a part of the solution" and interviewee I said that “I would say that my personal feelings [...] are reflected in the company. And that also creates a very strong identification with the brand and what I stand for”. After stating that her cognitions on sustainability coincide with her company’s view, interviewee K explained: “I took a long time before I actually took the job. Because I thought it was really important to me that my personal attitude and passion could be put into practice. Because I couldn't have done that [otherwise].”

Cognitions, Conflicts & Consumption: Work CSR congruence and employees’ cognitions and rationalization in the fair fashion industry