Table 5. Overview and implications of... | Emerald Publishing

Table 5.

Overview and implications of the integration dimensions

Criteria	Technical integration	Management integration
Core concept	Systemic linking of EMCSs with MCSs through shared infrastructures and calculability mechanisms	Coordination through shared routines, knowledge exchange, and cognitive alignment across professions
Original basis (Gond et al., 2012)	Builds on the technical integration dimension	Builds on and combines the organizational and cognitive integration dimensions
Focus	Infrastructure and data flow between systems	Interpersonal alignment, professional collaboration, shared understanding
Objective	Improves data quality, cost traceability, and resource efficiency	Fosters joint learning, best practice sharing, and holistic recognition of environmental issues
Operational mechanisms	ERP systems, databases, dashboards and calculability infrastructures	Joint formal routines, shared practices, communication between controllers and sustainability managers
Key challenges	Siloed data, incompatible systems	Differing worldviews, role boundaries, cognitive biases
Theoretical logic	Performance improves when data are visible, standardized, and accessible: enabling efficient decisions based on measurable environmental and financial impacts	Performance improves when people share a common understanding and routines: enabling collaboration, learning, and purposeful action aligned with organizational goals
Transformational process	Deliberate structural transformation; reconfigures calculability infrastructures and decision-making logics	Deliberate cultural transformation; reshapes roles, expands professional boundaries, and fosters shared accountability
Empirical evidence	Moderates the EMCS–FP (+) relationship: Significant only when technical integration is high (contingent relationship)	Moderates the EMCS–EP (+) relationship: Stronger effect when management integration is high (enhancing relationship)
Empirical implications	Clarifies inconsistent findings regarding the EMCS–FP relationship by showing that technical integration is a necessary condition; makes environmental cost–benefit logic visible and supports eco-efficiency	Explains the variation in EP through enhanced collaboration and learning across professions; management integration strengthens the effect of EMCSs on EP by overcoming cognitive and functional barriers

Criteria	Technical integration	Management integration
Core concept	Systemic linking of EMCSs with MCSs through shared infrastructures and calculability mechanisms	Coordination through shared routines, knowledge exchange, and cognitive alignment across professions
Original basis (Gond et al., 2012)	Builds on the technical integration dimension	Builds on and combines the organizational and cognitive integration dimensions
Focus	Infrastructure and data flow between systems	Interpersonal alignment, professional collaboration, shared understanding
Objective	Improves data quality, cost traceability, and resource efficiency	Fosters joint learning, best practice sharing, and holistic recognition of environmental issues
Operational mechanisms	ERP systems, databases, dashboards and calculability infrastructures	Joint formal routines, shared practices, communication between controllers and sustainability managers
Key challenges	Siloed data, incompatible systems	Differing worldviews, role boundaries, cognitive biases
Theoretical logic	Performance improves when data are visible, standardized, and accessible: enabling efficient decisions based on measurable environmental and financial impacts	Performance improves when people share a common understanding and routines: enabling collaboration, learning, and purposeful action aligned with organizational goals
Transformational process	Deliberate structural transformation; reconfigures calculability infrastructures and decision-making logics	Deliberate cultural transformation; reshapes roles, expands professional boundaries, and fosters shared accountability
Empirical evidence	Moderates the EMCS–FP (+) relationship: Significant only when technical integration is high (contingent relationship)	Moderates the EMCS–EP (+) relationship: Stronger effect when management integration is high (enhancing relationship)
Empirical implications	Clarifies inconsistent findings regarding the EMCS–FP relationship by showing that technical integration is a necessary condition; makes environmental cost–benefit logic visible and supports eco-efficiency	Explains the variation in EP through enhanced collaboration and learning across professions; management integration strengthens the effect of EMCSs on EP by overcoming cognitive and functional barriers

Note(s):

EMCS = environmental management control system; EP = environmental performance; ERP = enterprise resource planning; FP = financial performance; MCS = management control system