This article aimed at answering the following research question: How do institutional pressures influence the engagement of organisations with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic? To address it, we applied a survey with Brazilian organisations in late 2020. From group analysis and the comparison of means (test-t), we conclude that, in the pandemic scenario, organisations from various sectors and industries are affected mainly by coercive pressures but also by normative and, to a lesser extent, mimetic pressures. Furthermore, this study has shown that while opportunities are arising from normative and mimetic institutional pressures, it is in the coercive pressures that the guidance lies for the re-establishment of economic, social, and environmental development and prosperity in a post-pandemic scenario. Thus, despite some optimistic results, achieving the purpose outlined by the 2030 Agenda seems to be distant or at least needs an even more substantial effort if its responsibility rests solely with legislative and governmental forces.

Purpose: This article answers the following research question: How do institutional pressures influence the re(actions) of organizations in relation to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in the context of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic?Design/methodology/approach: The present research was conducted through the search and review of online secondary sources based on a critical and exploratory analysis. The data were obtained from the Global Compact Brazilian Committee (Rede Brasil do Pacto Global, in Portuguese) and analyzed by means of qualitative content analysis with the support of the ATLAS.ti software.Findings: The results have showed the role of organizations in dealing with the impacts provoked by the current COVID-19 scenario. However, the association of actions implemented by organizations is evident in some SDGs, but not in all and not with the same intensity. There is a higher incidence of SDG 3 (Good health and well-being), which is linked to 278 actions. Regarding institutional pressures, we noticed a higher incidence of normative pressures, which may indicate a sense of responsibility towards employees and other stakeholders related to the prevention of the impacts caused by the pandemic.Practical implications: The findings presented here can encourage companies to better direct their efforts to fight the virus without neglecting the 2030 Agenda.Social implications: The authors intend to encourage institutions that may exert coercive, normative, and mimetic pressures to recognize the impacts of their influence and better direct it to the interests of society during and after the pandemic.Originality/value: This research investigates organizational actions in the context of COVID-19 from an institutional theory perspective.