社会责任履行与企业信誉资本生成——基于问卷调查的实证分析

信誉是企业利益相关者对企业的一种综合评价,社会责任影响利益相关者行为,因此对企业信誉可能产生积极的影响.通过问卷调查的实证分析,发现顾客责任、环境责任和慈善责任对企业信誉有显著的正向影响,而政府责任和员工责任对企业信誉影响不明显.     

Business and Social Reputation: Exploring the Concept and Main Dimensions of Corporate Reputation

Different theoretical approaches highlight the growing relevance of corporate reputation as strategic factor. Among these approaches the arguments of the Resource-Based View are special worthwhile (Grant, 1991, California Management Review 33(3), 114–135; Barney, 1999, Sloan Management Review Spring, 137–145). Nevertheless, this topic poses several methodological problems (Barney et al., 2001), as the unavailability to identify and measure this organizational factor, that is “socially complex” and intangible in its nature. In this work, using the findings of our empirical research on Spanish biotechnology firms, we carry out an identification and measurement of corporate reputation, highlighting its two key components: “business reputation” and “social reputation”. Dr. Gregorio Martín de Castro is Assistant Professor at the Business Administration Department in Universidad Complutense de Madrid (Spain). He has several years of research experience at CIC Spanish Knowledge Society Research Centre, he holds an Expert Diploma in Intellectual Capital and Knowledge Management from INSEAD (France), and he was a Post-Doctoral Research Fellow at Harvard University during 2004–2005. He is author and co-author of several papers concerning Resource-Based View, Intellectual Capital and Knowledge Management. Dr. José Emilio Navas López is Professor and Head of the Business Administration Department in Universidad Complutense de Madrid (Spain). He is author and co-author of several books and papers concerning Technology Management, Strategy and Knowledge Management. He has held the first Knowledge Management Chair in Spain at I.U. Euroforum Escorial. Dr. Pedro López Sáez is Assistant Professor at the Business Administration Department in Universidad Complutense de Madrid (Spain) and he was a Research Fellow at Harvard University during 2004–2005. He has several years of research experience at CIC Spanish Knowledge Society Research Centre and he is author and co-author of several papers concerning Resource-Based View, Intellectual Capital and Knowledge Management.     

企业社会责任对战略风险的影响

企业社会责任已经成为企业能否走上可持续发展之路的重要保障,面对突如其来的疫情,“风险”一词进入大众视野,疫情带来的影响,让企业深深感受到现在正处于一个典型的风险社会。企业如何应对风险,做好风险管理是将要面临的新挑战。这些使得我们将企业社会责任(CSR)与风险管理联系在一起,从企业战略出发探讨社会责任和企业风险的联系,揭示二者之间的内在联系,一是具有促进企业自主履行社会责任,减小企业风险的实践意义;二是有助于推动拓展企业社会责任与战略风险的相关研究。     

Roadmapping Corporate Social Responsibility in Finnish Companies

This paper presents a roadmap of Finnish companies adopting and managing corporate social responsibility (CSR). It discusses the companies' views on CSR and highlights the practices that Finnish companies have adopted or are currently adopting. It also presents a framework that outlines the CSR processes and management prospects.Results showed that Finnish companies are progressively managing CSR. This newly revived thinking about social responsibility is viewed as an issue traced back from Finland's history of industrial development. There is no general definition of CSR; however, various concepts are connoted into it. Driven by several factors, CSR is developing gradually as indicated by the positive responses and initiatives of the companies.CSR management and practices towards employees, suppliers, community and customers are well defined locally based generally on established socially responsible behavior which could be articulated by laws and regulations, corporate values and business ethics. However, managing CSR with a global scope, problems such as; lack of information and structured management system, different views and interpretations, supply chain complexities, overlap with environmental issues, etc. often lead some companies to manage CSR haphazardly. Views and management of CSR are also influenced by some distinct Finnish cultural attributes.An initial conceptual framework for CSR is drawn reflecting the current practices and prospects for management strategies. Such framework can be used in organizing and streamlining CSR elements for effective management approaches and measuring of performance. It could be expected that in due time, the efforts of the companies will become more evident, organized and systematically managed.     

Corporate Reputation and Philanthropy: An Empirical Analysis

This paper analyzes the determinants of corporate reputation within a sample of large UK companies drawn from a diverse range of industries. We pay particular attention to the role that philanthropic expenditures and policies may play in shaping the perceptions of companies among their stakeholders. Our findings highlight that companies which make higher levels of philanthropic expenditures have better reputations and that this effect varies significantly across industries. Given that reputational indices tend to reflect the financial performance of organizations above other factors (Fryxell, G. E. and J. Wang: 1994, Journal of Management 20, 1–14) and that elements of the literature emphasise that discretionary aspects of social responsibility, including corporate donations, may not be in the financial interests of organizations (e.g. Friedman, M.: 1970, “The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits”, New York Times Magazine, September 13), this is a significant finding. It suggests that philanthropic expenditures may play a significant role in stakeholder management and may, in particular, lead to stakeholders holding more positive impressions of philanthropic corporations.     

Corporate Social Responsibility: Exploring Stakeholder Relationships and Programme Reporting across Leading FTSE Companies

Although it is now widely recognised by business leaders that their companies need to accept a broader responsibility than short-term profits, recent research suggests that as corporate social responsibility (CSR) and social reporting become more widespread, there is little empirical evidence of the range of stakeholders addressed through their CSR programmes and how such programmes are reported. Through a CSR framework which was developed in an exploratory study, we explore the nature of stakeholder relationships reported across leading FTSE companies and the importance they attach to communicating both social and business outcomes. It is evident from the hypotheses tested that the bigger FTSE companies, particularly extraction companies and telecoms, are more adept at identifying and prioritising their stakeholders, and linking CSR programmes to business and social outcomes. However, we draw the general conclusion that building stronger stakeholder relationships through CSR programmes – other than with customers – is not currently a priority for most companies. We also conclude that a limited sophistication in managing multiple stakeholders may compromise the impact of CSR upon business and social results. Finally, the managerial implications and the contribution of our study are discussed before closing with an acknowledgement of the limitations of this work and suggestions for further research.     

Social Marketing and Privately Held Companies: The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility Activities on Romanian Consumers

The notion of corporate social responsibility has evolved into a fairly complex concept that can influence the very world we live in. Today's society is interested not only in companies' financial results but also in the way they conduct their businesses. Corporations everywhere try to respond to new environmental challenges by actively engaging in the life of the community and by developing relationships based on mutual trust with consumers. This article introduces the corporate social responsibility domain by underlining the importance of this concept to the later development of a company. The article denounces the results of research conducted on Romanian consumers regarding corporate social responsibility campaigns undergone by firms in Romania. Its purpose is to bring insight into Romanian consumers' perceptions of recent social campaigns, reviewing the extent to which these consumers are willing to become involved in society's well-being. The survey conducted here attempts to provide answers to issues that concern the companies' involvement type, their purview, the reasons for participating in society's welfare, as well as the social campaigns' most common action areas. The results gathered show that corporate social responsibility is not only a promotion method, but a method that implies the effective involvement in the life of the community and in its subsequent issues, therefore representing a real means of support for the economic development of the community in question. In conclusion, companies must put their social conscience into use when dealing with their clients and stakeholders, by offering solutions to environmental concerns, resource management, mutual aid, and welfare rising from corporate support.     

Corporate Social Responsibility and Resource-Based Perspectives

Firms engage in corporate social responsibility (CSR) because they consider that some kind of competitive advantage accrues to them. We contend that resource-based perspectives (RBP) are useful to understand why firms engage in CSR activities and disclosure. From a resource-based perspective CSR is seen as providing internal or external benefits, or both. Investments in socially responsible activities may have internal benefits by helping a firm to develop new resources and capabilities which are related namely to know-how and corporate culture. In effect, investing in social responsibility activities and disclosure has important consequences on the creation or depletion of fundamental intangible resources, namely those associated with employees. The external benefits of CSR are related to its effect on corporate reputation. Corporate reputation can be understood as a fundamental intangible resource which can be created or depleted as a consequence of the decisions to engage or not in social responsibility activities and disclosure. Firms with good social responsibility reputation may improve relations with external actors. They may also attract better employees or increase current employees’ motivation, morale, commitment and loyalty to the firm. This article contributes to the understanding of why CSR may be seen as having strategic value for firms and how RBP can be used in such endeavour. Manuel Castelo Branco is Invited Lecturer of Accounting at the Faculty of Economics, University of Porto. He is a Ph.D. candidate at the School of Economics and Management, University of Minho. His research has been published in journals such as the Social Responsibility Journal and Corporate Communications: An International Journal. Lúcia Lima Rodrigues, Ph.D is Associate Professor at the School of Economics and Management, University of Minho. She is the Head of the Department of Management and the Director of the Master in Accounting and Management. She is the Editor of the Portuguese Journal of Accounting and Management, Editor for Europe of the international journal Accounting History. She is referee in several Portuguese and International journals. Her research has been published in several major international journals in Accounting such as The Accounting Historians Journal, Accounting Education: An International Journal, Critical Perspectives on Accounting and Accounting Forum.     

Corporate Social Responsibility

In the context of some criticism about social responsibility education in business schools, the paper reports findings from a survey of CSR education (teaching and research) in Europe. It analyses the extent of CSR education, the different ways in which it is defined and the levels at which it is taught. The paper provides an account of the efforts that are being made to mainstream CSR teaching and of the teaching methods deployed. It considers drivers of CSR courses, particularly the historical role of motivated individuals and the anticipation of future success being dependent on more institutional drivers. Finally it considers main developments in CSR research both by business school faculty and PhD students, tomorrows researchers and the resources devoted to CSR research. The conclusion includes questions that arise and further research directions.     

Corporate Social Responsibility Audit: From Theory to Practice

This research examines the possibility of developing a new corporate social responsibility (CSR) auditing system based on the analysis of current CSR literature and interviews conducted with a number of interested and knowledgeable stakeholders. This work attempts to create a framework for social responsibility auditing compatible with an existing commercially successful environmental audit system. The project is unusual in that it tackles the complex issue of CSR auditing with a scientific approach using Grounded Theory. On the evidence discovered to date in the literature review and the interviews, CSR seems to be perceived by many as the social strand of sustainable development. However, there is far less agreement regarding its measurement. Both the literature review and the interview analysis indicate that developing an applied CSR auditing procedure will be a challenging task. This is principally due to the lack of formal study of this complex subject, which, despite the widespread debate it has engendered, still lacks a single and broadly accepted definition. The concepts developed from the findings of this research, together with the key factors identified in a literature review of CSR, were developed into a prospective CSR audit protocol.     

社会责任活动、社会责任沟通与企业价值

企业履行适当的社会责任是大势所趋,但目前理论与实务界对社会责任经济后果的认识存在困惑,难以指导企业的社会责任实践。企业社会责任对企业价值的影响因不同社会责任类型的收益、成本特征而异,并且社会责任价值实现受制于社会责任沟通的影响,企业应该在整体战略规划的视野里树立社会责任管理理念,对企业社会责任进行事前决策和实时的过程管理。     

信誉战略——企业在市场信誉机制不健全环境下的战略选择

基于信誉是企业竞争优势之源的观点,可以得出企业信誉战略是企业战略理论的演化的趋势。在市场信誉机制不健全环境下企业信誉成为稀缺资源。企业构筑信誉战略要有良好的内外环境作为支撑,依着企业信誉战略内涵和性质,构建起企业信誉战略体系框架。处理好企业所要处理的问题。     

From Management Systems to Corporate Social Responsibility

At the start of the 21st century, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) seems to have great potential for innovating business practices with a positive impact on People, Planet and Profit. In this article the differences between the management systems approach of the nineties, and Corporate Social Responsibility are analysed.An analysis is structured around three business principles that are relevant for CSR and management systems: (1) doing things right the first time, (2) doing the right things, and (3) continuous improvement and innovation. Basically CSR is focussing on the second principle, and management systems focus on the first. However, CSR is very likely to build on the management systems as well.From a CSR point of view, the existing generation of management systems with their focus on rational control (= doing things right) can only be of limited use in the development of CSR. However, the preventive rationalities of management systems are important. Values and the principle doing the right things is extremely relevant for CSR. This goes far beyond the present generation of ISO type management systems; opportunities stem from building on TQM approaches like the EFQM Business Excellence model. Continuous improvement and innovation is a permanent challenge underlying the two other business principles, and requires both individual and organisational learning processes. In the present generation of management systems, continuous improvement mainly addresses rational prevention, barely the value aspects of business.For the further development and implementation of CSR, each of the three business management principles are vital. There is a need for a new generation of management systems that addresses the values at stake in strategic decision-making, both at company level and in the behaviour of individuals, while the rationalities of prevention and anticipation are still relevant. In both directions more emphasis for continuous learning and innovation will be needed.CSR is likely to trigger the development of management systems in the directions mentioned. This will support companies to be credible and transparent in improving the performance with respect to people, planet and profit.     

Corporate Social Responsibility and the Social Enterprise

In this article, we contend that due to their size and emphasis upon addressing external social concerns, the corporate relationship between social enterprises, social awareness and action is more complex than whether or not these organisations engage in corporate social responsibility (CSR). This includes organisations that place less emphasis on CSR as well as other organisations that may be very proficient in CSR initiatives, but are less successful in recording practices. In this context, we identify a number of internal CSR markers that may be applied to measuring the extent to which internal CSR practices are being observed. These considerations may be contrasted with the evidence that community based CSR activities is often well developed in private sector small to medium sized enterprises (SMEs) (Observatory of European SMEs, 2002), a situation which may be replicated in social enterprises especially those that have grown from micro-enterprises embedded in local communities. We place particular emphasis upon the implications for employee management. Underpinning our position is the Aristotelian-informed capabilities approach, a theory of human development and quality of life, developed by Sen (1992; 1999) and Nussbaum (1999) which has been developed further, in an organisational context, (e.g., Cornelius, 2002); Cornelius and Gagnon, 2004; Gagnon and Cornelius, 1999; Vogt, 2005. We contend that the capabilities approach offers additional insights into CSR in social enterprises in general and internal CSR activity in particular. Our article concludes with proposals for future research initiatives and reflections upon social enterprise development from a capabilities perspective.     

Assessing Arms Makers’ Corporate Social Responsibility

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has become a focal point for research aimed at extending business ethics to extra-corporate issues; and as a result many companies now seek to at least appear dedicated to one or another version of CSR. This has not affected the arms industry, however. For, this industry has not been discussed in CSR literature, perhaps because few CSR scholars have questioned this industry’s privileged status as an instrument of national sovereignty. But major changes in the organization of political communities call traditional views of sovereignty into question. With these considerations in mind I assess the U.S. arms industry on the basis of CSR requirements regarding the environment, social equity, profitability, and use of political power. I find that this industry fails to meet any of these four CSR requirements. Countering a claim that these failings should not be held against arms manufacturers because their products are crucial to national defense, I contend that many of these companies function not as dutiful agents of a nation-state but as politically powerful entities in their own right. So, I conclude, they should be held responsible for the foreseeable consequences that flow from use of their products. This responsibility should include civil liability and, in cases involving war crimes and violations of human rights, responsibility under international human rights standards. Edmund F. Byrne is emeritus professor of philosophy, Indiana University, and a section editor and sometime contributor to the Journal of Business Ethics. His specialties: philosophy of work and social and political philosophy. Recent publications in the former field include “Work” in the Encyclopedia of Science, Technology, and Ethics, and in the latter field three articles that examine the US government's unpublicized geopolitical motives for its military action in the Middle East. An erratum to this article can be found at     

Corporate Social Responsibility: Views from the Frontline

This paper offers an evaluation of corporate policy and practice in respect of corporate social responsibility (CSR) deriving from an analysis of qualitative data, obtained during semi-structured interviews with the representatives of 16 companies from a variety of UK sectors including retail, mining, financial services and mobile telephony. The findings of the empirical survey are presented in five sections that trace chronologically the process of CSR policy development. The first identifies the meaning attributed to CSR by the respondent companies followed in the second section by the factors that are driving them to implement the CSR agenda. The third examines the use of the language of CSR and the concept’s role as either a substantive concept or simple label. The fourth identifies the criteria used for determining CSR policies and the objectives underlying them. The fifth and final section offers an analysis of the respondents’ predictions as to the future development of CSR. On the basis of the findings of the survey, this paper argues that, despite genuine attempts on the part of those responsible for CSR policy development to address stakeholder concerns, the context within which CSR has been implemented hinders its potential to offer stakeholders sufficient information by which to evaluate corporate performance in respect of CSR and the ability of CSR to operate as a meaningful and systematic constraint on corporate behaviour. Lisa Whitehouse is a Senior Lecturer in the Law School at the University of Hull. She has published in the areas of the English law of mortgage, the UK railway infrastructure and corporate social responsibility. She received her Ph.D. in Law from the University of Hull.     

Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Social Investment: The South African Case

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate social investment (CSI) have become terms that are used to examine some activities of businesses. With globalization pressures and increasing burdens on governments to provide comprehensive social services, the microscope has been trained on how firms play their part in sharing this burden. Views vary from those who believe that CSR and CSI are a distraction from profit maximization to those who argue that participation in such activities contributes to positive social transformation, while benefiting participating firms themselves. In this article, the author seeks to organize these debates within particular theoretical frameworks, positing CSR and CSI, together with the Socially Responsible Investment Index that has been used to evaluate corporate behavior in South Africa, as a novel way of addressing pressing development problems.     

Taming Trojan Horses: Identifying and Mitigating Corporate Social Responsibility Risks

Organizations are exposed to increasing pressures from their constituents to integrate corporate social responsibility (CSR) principles into their ongoing business practices. But accepting new and potentially open-ended commitments is not a harmless exercise, and companies may well expose themselves to serious risks when embracing such principles. To identify these risks, we conducted two naturalistic studies: one exploratory, the other corroborative. The results show that CSR adoption is associated with at least seven different business risks, ranging from failing strategy implementation to legitimacy destruction. To alleviate these risks, we discuss a set of managerial mitigation strategies that have the potential to realign companies’ CSR activities with their strategic objectives. Pursey Heugens is an Associate Professor of Organization Theory in the Department of Business-Society Management at RSM Erasmus University. He received his PhD from the same school. His research interests span positive and normative theories of organizaton, including bureaucracy theory, neo-institutional theory, contractualist business ethics, and virtue ethics. Nikolay Dentchev is an independent research fellow at Ghent University, Belgium, and a project coordinator at the corporate venturing department of Fortis Group (Fortis Venturing). He holds a Ph.D. in business economics from Ghent University. His current research is related to entrepreneurship, instrumental stakeholder theory, and management challenges of corporate social responsibility     

Fostering Corporate Social Responsibility Through Public Initiative: From the EU to the Spanish Case

Should CSR be approached only on a voluntary basis or should it be complemented with a compulsory regulatory framework? What type of government intervention is more effective in fostering CSR among companies? This paper is an attempt to answer these questions, reviewing the debate between proponents of the voluntary case and the obligatory case for CSR, and critically analysing current international government-led initiatives to foster CSR among companies, and national government-led initiatives in the EU area. Finally, the paper focuses on the Spanish case, as an example of the failure of an exclusively voluntary approach. Despite the rapid uprise of CSR, Spain is still far behind late in CSR promotion strategies. Most action has been undertaken by companies themselves with no common guidelines, governmental support, or independent verification. The lack of a regulatory framework for CSR or ethical investment issues and the virtual absence of other indirect incentives, explains the misbalance between private, public and Third Sector initiatives. Based on the Spanish context which is quite similar to other non-OECD countries, the authors call for a more proactive government position in CSR related issues. The conclusions of the paper detail the features of this regulatory framework and other policies to promote CSR in Spain as well as in other OECD countries.     

Practical Implications of Educational Background on Future Corporate Exceutives' Social Responsibility Orientation

Differences between business students atsecular and non-secular universities withregard to their corporate social responsibilityorientation (CSRO) are examined. The resultsshow that the two groups' attitudes toward thefour components of CSRO are significantlydifferent. Specifically, compared to businessstudents in non-secular institutions, thestudents of secular universities exhibitgreater concern about the legal component ofcorporate responsibility and a weakerorientation toward discretionary activities. Nosignificant differences between the two groupswere observed with respect to economicperformance and the ethical dimension.Explanations as well as limited generalizationsand implications are developed.