The Evolution of Business Groups’ Corporate Social Responsibility

Although establishing gender equality in board and managerial positions has recently become more important for organizations, companies with low levels of gender diversity seem to perceive an ethical dilemma regarding the ways, in which they attempt to attain it. One way that organizations try to move toward gender equality is through the use of their corporate websites to manage potential applicants’ impressions of their current levels of, and actions to improve, gender diversity. The dilemma is whether to truthfully communicate their low level of gender diversity, conceal it, or exaggerate it. On the one hand, organizations that are truthful may find it difficult to achieve equality because women are less attracted to companies that lack diversity. On the other hand, organizations that are untruthful risk their moral legitimacy. The present work investigates gender diversity-related communication on the corporate websites of 99 major German companies. Based on theoretical work on minority attraction, we apply an organizational impression management taxonomy to guide our in-depth content analysis. With this approach, we hope to advance the understanding of how the issue of gender diversity is presented on corporate websites, which is useful for both organizational decision makers as well as diversity researchers. We found that although gender diversity-related communications on corporate websites contain both assertive and defensive organizational impression management tactics, as well as a third type of tactic we refer to as “acknowledgement,” assertive tactics were used more frequently. We argue the existence of a paradox whereby organizations use assertive impression management tactics to maintain pragmatic legitimacy but compromise their moral legitimacy by doing so. Furthermore, we argue that moral legitimacy can be maintained or restored through the sincere use of defensive impression management tactics and acknowledgement.     

Rights and Corporate Social Responsibility: Competing or Complementary Approaches to Poverty Reduction and Socioeconomic Rights?

Following the situation of poverty in the rights paradigm, this paper explores the links between the rights-based and corporate social responsibility (CSR) approaches to the realization of socioeconomic rights in the broader context of an emerging recognition of CSR as private regulation of business behaviour. It examines complex theoretical and practical dimensions of responsibility and potential contributions of businesses to poverty alleviation and clarifies the apparent paradox of legal compulsion of essentially voluntary CSR activities. Rather than treat rights and CSR as parallel approaches to protecting socioeconomic rights, it is argued that CSR can be part of a coherent framework of laws and policies for legally translating broad human rights commitments to poverty reduction into concrete programmes. The paper demonstrates how legally propped CSR arrangements can support poverty reduction and appropriate task-specific contextualised definitions and boundaries of CSR that complement the rights-based approach. It is argued that human rights principles have normative dimensions to guide and help formulate policies, programmes and practices, which in turn allow for a creative use of and legal prop to CSR. The conceptualization of human rights is not restricted to one implementation method, and CSR can partly satisfy states’ human rights obligations and transcend the narrow conventional human rights discourse on obligations of non-state actors.     

Benchmarking and Transparency: Incentives for the Pharmaceutical Industry’s Corporate Social Responsibility

With over 2 billion people lacking medicines for treatable diseases and 14 million people dying annually from infectious disease, there is undeniable need for increased access to medicines. There has been an increasing trend to benchmark the pharmaceutical industry on their corporate social responsibility (CSR) performance in access to medicines. Benchmarking creates a competitive inter-business environment and acts as incentive for improving CSR. This article investigates the corporate feedback discourses pharmaceutical companies make in response to criticisms from benchmarking reports. It determines whether these responses are part of a healthy process in increasing access to medicines or a barrier to improvement. A qualitative analysis on the feedback the industry provided was performed, and the responses seen in these statements were grouped by analysing the language used, the ideas portrayed and atti-tudes of the companies. Increasing transparency through benchmarking is a powerful tool which reveals the industry’s shortfalls to the public, affects the decisions of socially responsible investors, and is a risk to their financial bottom line. This article demonstrates the importance of benchmarking and transparency in creating inter-business competition and the translation of these responses to actual access to medicine practices.     

Corporate Social Responsibility and Multi-Stakeholder Governance: Pluralism,Feminist Perspectives and Women’s NGOs

The corporate social responsibility (CSR) literature has increasingly explored relationships between civil society and social movements, including non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and corporations, as well as the role of NGOs in multi-stakeholder governance processes. This paper addresses the challenge of including a plurality of civil society voices and perspectives in business–NGO relations, and in CSR as a process of governance. The paper contributes to CSR scholarship by bringing insights from feminist literature to bear on CSR as a process of governance, and engaging with leaders of women’s NGOs, a group of actors rarely included in CSR research. The issues raised inform contributions to the CSR literature relating to the role of women’s NGOs with regard to the gender equality practices and impacts of corporations, and with respect to defining the meaning and practice of CSR. The paper frames marginalized NGOs as important actors which can contribute to pluralism, inclusion and legitimacy in CSR as a process of governance. It identifies several key barriers to the participation of women’s NGOs in CSR, and concludes by making suggestions for future research, as well as practice.     

Corporate Responsibility for Economic,Social and Cultural Rights: Rights in Search of a Remedy?

It is no longer a revelation that companies have some responsibility to uphold human rights. However, delineating the boundaries of the relationship between business and human rights is more vexed. What is it that we are asking corporations to assume responsibility for and how far does that responsibility extend? This article focuses on the extent to which economic, social and cultural rights fall within a corporation’s sphere of responsibility. It then analyses how corporations may be held accountable for violations of such rights. Specifically, the article considers the use of soft law as a protective mechanism; it also details how victims of harmful corporate behaviour are using litigation (pursuant to ATCA and common law domestic causes of action) to seek redress and recognition of the harms they have directly or indirectly experienced. The article concludes with an analysis of Professor Ruggie’s (the United Nations Special Representative on the issue of transnational corporations and human rights) 2008 and 2009 Reports in which it is suggested that a respect-based framework must be interpreted as imposing proactive requirements on companies to prevent the infringement of human rights. Future efforts must also be directed towards the recognition of a specialised complementary corporate responsibility to protect human rights.     

Corporate Social Responsibility and Employee–Company Identification

This study proposes two identification cuing factors (i.e., CSR associations and CSR participation) to understand how corporate social responsibility (CSR) relates to employees’ identification with their firm. The results reveal that a firm’s CSR initiatives increase employee–company identification (E–C identification). E–C identification, in turn, influences employees’ commitment to their company. However, CSR associations do not directly influence employees’ identification with a firm, but rather influence their identification through perceived external prestige (PEP). Compared to CSR associations, CSR participation has a direct influence on E–C identification. On the basis of these findings, it is argued that CSR performance can be an effective way for companies to maintain a positive relationship with their employees.     

Consumers’ Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility: Scale Development and Validation

Researchers and companies are paying increasing attention to corporate social responsibility (CSR) programs and the reaction to them by consumers. Despite such corporate efforts and an expanding literature exploring consumers’ response to CSR, it remains unclear how consumers perceive CSR and which “Gestalt” consumers have in mind when considering CSR. Academics and managers lack a tool for measuring consumers’ perceptions of CSR (CPCSR). This research explores CPCSR and develops a measurement model. Based on qualitative data from interviews with managers and consumers, the authors develop a conceptualization of CPCSR. Subsequently, model testing and validating occurs on three large quantitative data sets. The conceptualization and the measurement scale can assist companies to assess CPCSR relative to their performance. They also enable managers in identifying shortcomings in CSR engagement and/or communication. Finally, the paper discusses implications for marketing practice and future research.     

The Role of CEO’s Personal Incentives in Driving Corporate Social Responsibility

In this study, we explore the role of Chief Executive Officers’ (CEOs’) incentives, split between monetary (based on both bonus compensation and changes in the value of the CEO’s portfolio of stocks and options) and non-monetary (career concerns, incoming/departing CEOs, and power and entrenchment), in relation to corporate social responsibility (CSR). We base our analysis on a sample of 597 US firms over the period 2005–2009. We find that both monetary and non-monetary incentives have an effect on CSR decisions. Specifically, monetary incentives designed to align the CEO’s and shareholders’ interests have a negative effect on CSR and non-monetary incentives have a positive effect on CSR. The study has important implications for the design of executive remuneration (compensation) plans, as we show that there are many levers that can affect the CEO’s decisions with regard to CSR. Our evidence also confirms the prominent role of the CEO in relation to CSR decisions, while also recognizing the complexity of factors affecting CSR. Finally, we propose a research design that takes into account endogeneity issues arising when examining compensation variables.     

Managerial Talent and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): How Do Talented Managers View Corporate Social Responsibility?

Motivated by the ongoing debate on the costs and benefits of corporate social responsibility (CSR), we explore how talented managers view CSR investments. Based on nearly 20,000 observations across 17 years, our evidence reveals a nonmonotonic effect of managerial talent on CSR. Exploiting a novel measure of managerial ability, we find that talented managers view CSR investments favorably. However, only those with especially strong talent are in favor of CSR investments. For executives ranked above the 75th percentile in terms of managerial talent, an increase in managerial ability leads to more CSR investments, suggesting that these strongly talented managers perceive CSR as enhancing firm performance. In contrast, for those with weaker talent, CSR investments are negatively associated with managerial ability, implying that these weakly talented managers view CSR as a wasteful deployment of resources. Further evidence shows that our conclusion is unlikely confounded by endogeneity.     

Directors’ Roles in Corporate Social Responsibility: A Stakeholder Perspective

We propose that corporate directors are important in helping organizations deal with two major issues of stakeholders. First, directors can help manage the interests of organizational stakeholders, and second, they assist in protecting the interests of their organizations as stakeholders in society. Their contribution can be conceptualized as the directors’ roles in corporate social responsibility (DR-CSR). We identify two types of DR-CSR, organization-centered and society-centered roles. Based on a study of 120 corporate directors, we observe that the more concern that corporate directors have for stakeholders, the more likely that they will perceive the need to perform their DR-CSR effectively.     

Chinese Consumers’ Perception of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)

The findings of this article increase our understanding of corporate social responsibility from the consumers’ perspective in a Chinese setting. Based on primary data collected via a self-administered survey in Shanghai and Hong Kong and results of similar studies conducted in Europe and the United States, we provide evidence to show that Chinese consumers are more supportive of CSR. We also show that Carroll’s pyramid of responsibilities can be applied in China. We evaluated the importance placed by Chinese consumers on the four responsibilities of firms – economic, legal, ethical and philanthropic – and find that economic responsibilities are most important while philanthropic responsibilities are of least importance. The nature of these differences is important for firms intending to use corporate social responsibility for strategic purposes.     

The Relationship between Religiousness and Corporate Social Responsibility Orientation: Are there Differences Between Business Managers and Students?

The purpose of this paper is to determine whether there is a relationship between a person’s degree of religiousness and corporate social responsibility orientation. A total of 411 managers and 506 students from seven universities were surveyed. The statistical analysis showed that religiousness does influence students’ orientation toward the economic, ethical, and philanthropic responsibilities of business. It does not, however, have a significant impact upon the managers’ attitudes. When the “low religiousness” students and managers were compared, differences were found with respect to the economic, ethical, and philanthropic components of corporate social responsibility. Similar results were obtained when the “high religiousness” students and managers were compared. The implications of these findings are discussed. Nabil Ibrahim is the Grover Maxwell Professor of Business Administration at Augusta State University, Augusta, Georgia. He teaches courses in Strategic Management and Applied Statistics. Dr. Ibrahim’s articles have appeared in the Journal of Business Ethics, Health Care Management Review, the Journal of Applied Business Research, as well as many other journals and proceedings. Donald P. Howard is an Associate Professor of Management at Augusta State University, Augusta, Georgia. He teaches courses in Strategic Management and Entrepreneurship. His articles have appeared in a number of journals such as the Journal of Business Ethics, Journal of Applied Case Research, and Health Care Management Review, as well as many proceedings. John Angelidis is Professor and Chair, Department of Management, St. John’s University, New York, NY. He teaches courses in Strategic Management and International Business. Dr. Angelidis has published articles in the Journal of Business Ethics, Review of Business, Journal of Commerce and Management, as well as many other journals and proceedings.     

Just Doing Business or Doing Just Business: Google,Microsoft, Yahoo! and the Business of Censoring China’s Internet

This paper addresses the criticism recently directed at Internet companies who have chosen to do business in China. Currently, in order to conduct business in China, companies must agree to the Chinese government’s rule of self-censoring any information the government deems inappropriate. We start by explaining how some of these companies have violated the human rights of Chinese citizens to freely trade information. We then analyze whether the justifications and excuses offered by these companies are sufficient to absolve them of moral responsibility. We argue that both justifications and excuses offered are insufficient. Wilfully abiding by unjust laws, albeit necessary to do business in China, should not trump moral actions that protect rights. “This is not something we did enthusiastically, or not something that we are proud of at all.”– Elliot Schrage answering questions from Congress regarding Google’s decision to censor its Internet searches in China Neil Haddow is currently finishing his PhD in philosophy at the University of Waterloo. His interests are moral and political philosophy at the theoretical and applied levels. He is the co-author of another paper forthcoming in The Journal of Business Ethics on age discrimination and automobile insurance. G. Elijah Dann presently lectures for the Department of Philosophy at the University of Toronto. He is author of After Rorty: The possibilities for ethics and religious belief (Continuum Press, 2006), and is editor of a forthcoming book on Christianity entitled, Leaving Fundamentalism (Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 2007).     

Conceptualising Corporate Social Responsibility: ‘Relational Governance’ Assessed,Augmented, and Adapted

Academic interest in corporate social responsibility (CSR) can be traced back to the 1930s. Since then an impressive body of empirical data and theory-building has been amassed, mainly located in the fields of management studies and business ethics. One of the most noteworthy recent conceptual contributions to the scholarship is Midttun’s (Corporate Governance 5(3):159–174, 2005) CSR-oriented embedded relational model of societal governance. It re-conceptualises the relationships between the state, business, and civil society. Other scholars (In Albareda et al. Corporate Governance 6(4):386–400, 2006; Business Ethics: A European Review 17(4):347–363, 2008; Lozano et al., Governments and Corporate Social Responsibility, 2008) have recently successfully used the model as the basis for their analytical framework for researching CSR activities in a large number of western European countries. While this research offers valuable insights into how CSR is operationalised, it also suffers from a number of significant limitations. To develop a stronger analytical framework with which to explore CSR, this article draws more deeply on political science literature concerned with governance and public policy analysis. This represents the main purpose of this article. In addition, this article also addresses a second and more modest aim: to reflect on the ways in which relational governance-inspired frameworks could be adapted and applied to politico-economic systems where state-industry-third sector relations differ from those found in North America and Western Europe. Both lines of argument are illustrated using vignettes from a case study of the Evenkia Hydro-Electric Station building project in the Russian Federation.     

Multinational Firms’ Leadership Role in Corporate Social Responsibility in Latin America

This paper explores the commitment to corporate citizenship on the part of the largest U.S.-based multinationals in the emerging market region of Latin America. The websites of the largest U.S.-based firms – according to the 2007 Fortune 500 list – are reviewed and their CSR efforts in Latin America are noted. The firms’ positions on corporate citizenship in Latin America are mapped onto a three-by-three matrix in which firms’ commitment to corporate citizenship ranges from profit-making motivations to a more holistic approach where support for non-profit causes is embraced by the entire firm and implemented at all levels (Marsden, Business and Society Review 105(1), 9–26, 2000). The largest U.S.-based multinationals were selected for this study because of their leadership role and the fact that other firms within their respective industries may seek to emulate the firms’ level of commitment to corporate citizenship. While the matrix can be used to evaluate corporate citizenship efforts in any market – or globally – the emphasis in this study is on Latin America, a region of interest for two reasons: because of the paucity of research on this particular emerging market region as it relates to CSR, and because there is some evidence to suggest that philanthropic initiatives by the region’s wealthy individuals lag behind individual philanthropic efforts in other world regions (Oppenheimer, Latin America’s Rich Should Donate More. McClatchey-Tribune Regional News, 2007). If this is the case, this study aims to identify whether companies are picking up the slack.

“You make a living by what you get; but you make a life by what you give.” Winston Churchill

     

Effect of Business Education on Women and Men Students’ Attitudes on Corporate Responsibility in Society

This article describes a survey among Finnish business students to find answers to the following questions: How do business students define a well-run company? What are their attitudes on the responsibilities of business in society? Do the attitudes of women students differ from those of men? What is the influence of business education on these attitudes? Our sample comprised 217 students pursuing a master’s degree in business studies at two Finnish universities. The results show that, as a whole, students valued the stakeholder model of the company more than the shareholder model. However, attitudes differed according to gender: women students were more in favor of the stakeholder model and placed more weight on corporate ethical, environmental, and societal responsibilities than their men counterparts – both at the beginning and at the end of their studies. Thus, no gender socialization effect of business school education could be observed in this sense. Business school education was found to shape women and men students’ attitudes in two ways. Firstly, valuation of the shareholder model increased and, secondly, the importance of equal-opportunity employment decreased in the course of education. This raises the question whether the educational context is creating an undesirable tendency among future business professionals. The results further suggest that the sociocultural context can make a difference in how corporate social responsibility is perceived. The article also discusses possible ways to influence the attitudes of business students.     

Corporate Social Responsibility and Its Impact on Firms’ Investment Policy, Organizational Structure, and Performance

This study examines the determinants of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and its implications on firms’ investment policy, organizational strategy, and performance. First, we find that firms with better performance, higher R&D intensity, better financial health, and firms in new economy industries are more likely to engage in CSR activities, while riskier firms are less likely to do so. We also find U-shaped relation between firm size and CSR, indicating that either very small or very large firms exhibit high levels of CSR strengths and concerns. Next, we find that firms’ CSR strengths relate favorably with their investments, organizational strategy, and performance, whereas CSR concerns and firm attributes are by and large negatively related. Using a 2SLS procedure, we verify that the CSR–performance relation is robust to corrections for endogeneity through reverse causation and/or biases introduced by time varying omitted variables. Finally, we find that the CSR–firm attributes relation is strengthened when the CEO’s incentives are below the sample median, suggesting that CSR participation is especially important when monetary incentives are lower than benchmark levels.