Do Corporate Social Performance Targets in Executive Compensation Contribute to Corporate Social Performance?

To deal with potential conflicts between the triple-bottom-line expectations of investors and the performance of executives, firms can use incentives by integrating corporate social performance (CSP) targets into executive compensation. No evidence yet exists that CSP targets in executive compensation actually lead to an improvement of CSP results. Using a panel data set of 400 firms for the years 2008–2012 leading to 1846 firm-year observations, the relationships between CSP targets and CSP results and CSP improvements are analyzed. The results show that (a) the level of CSP has no effect on the use of CSP targets, (b) the use of CSP targets in general does not automatically lead to better CSP results, and (c) the use of quantitative, hard CSP targets is an effective way to improve CSP results, especially to lower CSP weaknesses.     

Corporate Motives for Social Initiative: Legitimacy, Sustainability, or the Bottom Line?

This article presents results of exploratory research conducted with managers from over 500 Norwegian companies to examine corporate motives for engaging in social initiatives. Three key questions were addressed. First, what do managers in this sample see as the primary reasons their companies engage in activities that benefit society? Second, do motives for such social initiative vary across the industries represented? Third, can further empirical support be provided for the theoretical classifications of social initiative motives outlined in the literature? Previous research on the topic is reviewed, study methods are described, results are presented, and implications of findings are discussed. The article concludes with the analysis of study limitations and directions for future research.     

Do Suppliers Applaud Corporate Social Performance?

The influence of corporate social performance (CSP) on stakeholders is one of the focal issues in corporate social responsibility (CSR) research. Using data of listed companies in China, this paper examines whether CSR behavior in the form of charitable donations garners a positive reaction from suppliers. Results derived from both level and change model regressions show that superior CSP makes it easier for a firm to obtain trade credit from suppliers, although the effect is significant only in non-state-owned enterprises (non-SOEs). The results are robust to various measures of CSP and endogeneity tests. The results support the strategic philanthropy view and apply stakeholder theory in supply chain, that strategic CSR can help firms to attract suppliers and consolidate cooperative relationships with them, which in turn benefits the firms in terms of more trade credit financing from suppliers. This paper also shows that state-owned enterprises and non-SOEs have different CSR intentions and use CSR to achieve strategic goals in different ways. The conclusions drawn from this study provide practical guidance on CSR strategy, suggesting that CSR activities can help a firm in transition economies to enhance its corporate image, establish and consolidate the good relationship with suppliers, and obtain economic benefits or achieve long-term business objectives.     

Can Corporate Divestiture Activities Lead to Better Corporate Social Performance?

Journal of Business Ethics - Prior research showed that corporate divestitures could help firms restore their strategic (versus financial) controls and long-term focus. This suggests that...     

Family Firms’ Corporate Social Performance: A Calculated Quest for Socioemotional Wealth

This study investigates the engagement of family firms in corporate social responsibility. We first compare their corporate social performance (CSP) to non-family firms. Then, following recent evidence on the heterogeneity of family firms, we examine two factors that may influence CSP within family firms: the level of family control and the governance orientation of the country in which they operate. This research is based on a theoretical framework which considers both agency and socioemotional wealth (SEW) influences on family firms CSR engagements. Overall, we find that family firms exhibit lower CSP than non-family firms. But when focusing on family firms, our analyses show a curvilinear relationship between family control and CSP. At lower levels of control, family owners invest more in social initiatives to protect their SEW. Beyond a threshold level of control that we estimate at 36 % in our sample, economic considerations prevail over SEW and social performance starts decreasing. We also find that family firms operating in stakeholder-oriented countries are more attentive to social concerns than those operating in more shareholder-oriented countries.     

Corporate Social Responsibility Engagement in Kenya: Bottom Line or Rhetoric?

Abstract

Over the last three decades, the concept of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has sparked considerable debate in the literature on management research. While previous research on the relationship between CSR and firm performance has largely been based on data gathered in developed countries, this paper examines the relationship between CSR and firm performance in Kenya, using a sample of 352 firm-years during the period 2005–2012. CSR was measured using four dimensions relevant to Kenya: employee CSR, product/service CSR, community CSR and environmental CSR, and aggregated using my own CSR index. Firm performance was measured using both ROA and ROE. Content analysis was used to collect data from the financial reports of companies. The results indicate a positive and significant relationship between employee CSR, product/service CSR and community CSR and firm performance; environmental CSR, on the other hand, was not significant. The overall CSR index was found to be positive and significant to both measures of firm performance.     

Does Firm Size Comfound the Relationship Between Corporate Social Performance and Firm Financial Performance?

There has been some theoretical and empirical debate that the positive relationship between corporate social performance (CSP) and firm financial performance (FFP) is spurious and in fact caused by a third factor, namely large firm size. This study examines this question by integrating three meta-analyses of more than two decades of research on (1) CSP and FFP, (2) firm size and CSP, and (3) firm size and FFP into one path-analytic model. The present study does not confirm size as a third factor which would confound the relationship between CSP and FFP. That is, even if firm size is controlled for across studies (comprising, on average, over 15 000 observations), CSP and FFP remain positively correlated, showing a "true-score" corrected path coefficient p of 0.37.     

Corporate Social Responsibility in Western Europe: An Institutional Mirror or Substitute?

In spite of extensive research on corporate social responsibility (CSR) and its link with economic and social performance, few studies have investigated the institutional determinants of CSR. This article draws upon neo-institutional theory and comparative institutional analysis to compare the influence of different institutional environments on CSR policies of European firms. On the basis of a dataset of European firms, we find that firms from the more liberal market economies of the Anglo-Saxon countries score higher on most dimensions of CSR than firms in the more coordinated market economies (CMEs) in Continental Europe. This result lends support to the view of voluntary CSR practices in liberal economies as being a substitute for institutionalized forms of stakeholder participation. Meanwhile, CSR tends not to mirror more institutionalized forms of stakeholder coordination. Instead, in CMEs, CSR often takes on more implicit forms. Our analysis also shows that national institutional and sectoral-level factors have an asymmetric effect – strongly influencing the likelihood of firms adopting ‘minimum standards’ of CSR, but having little influence on the adoption of ‘best practices’.     

Corporate Social Responsibility: Is it Rewarded by the Corporate Bond Market? A Critical Note

The question of whether corporate social responsibility (CSR) has a positive impact on firm value has been almost exclusively analysed from the perspective of the stock market. We have therefore investigated the relationship between the valuation of Euro corporate bonds and the standards of CSR of mainly European companies for the first time in this article. Generally, the debt market exhibits a considerable weight for corporate finance, for which reason creditors should basically play a significant role in the transmission of CSR into the valuation of financial instruments. Given that socially responsible firms are often regarded as economically more successful and less risky, they should have lower risk premia. The results of the empirical analysis, however, reveal that based on an extensive data panel the risk premium for socially responsible firms – according to the classification by SAM Group – was ceterius paribus higher than for non-socially responsible companies. However, only one case of the models investigated was weakly significant. Thus, largely the relationship has to be classified as marginal; so CSR has apparently not yet been incorporated into the pricing of corporate bonds.     

Inducing Corporate Social Responsibility: Should Investors Reward the Responsible or Punish the Irresponsible?

Journal of Business Ethics - Investors with a pro-social or sustainability agenda increasingly attempt to influence firm managers to adopt socially responsible behavior, either through...     

Does Corporate Social Responsibility Influence Firm Performance? Empirical Evidence from Harare,Zimbabwe

The influence of the dimensions of corporate social responsibility on firm performance are tested in Harare, Zimbabwe using perceptual data from a sample of 155 firms over a period of three years. Structural equation modeling was used to test the research hypotheses. The study found that employee relations, customer relations, community relations and investor relations all had a positive effect on firm performance. Environmental relations, diversity relations and supplier relations all did not influence firm performance. The study has implications on theory, policy and practice, and future research.     

How Does Corporate Social Responsibility Affect Corporate Continuous Innovation?

From the perspective of sustainable development, this paper analyzes the impact of corporate social responsibility (CSR) on the corporate continuous innovation based on the theory of innovation economics and the demand for innovationdriven development, and then conducts a series of empirical tests based on a sample of Chinese A-shared listed companies from 2008 to 2016. The results show that better CSR performance is conducive to the continuous innovation, and this positive relationship is more pronounced for firms with voluntary accounting information disclosure, for firms of non-high-technology industries, and when policy uncertainty is high. This paper not only enriches the literature on CSR but also provides theoretical references for the innovation practice of enterprises under the innovation-driven strategy.     

Corporate Entrepreneurs or Rogue Middle Managers? A Framework for Ethical Corporate Entrepreneurship

Corporate entrepreneurs -- described in the academic literature as those managers or employees who do not follow the status quo of their co-workers -- are depicted as visionaries who dream of taking the company in new directions. As a result, though, in overcoming internal obstacles to reaching their professional goals they can often walk a fine line between clever resourcefulness and outright rule breaking. A framework is presented as a guideline for middle managers and organizations seeking to impede unethical behaviors in the pursuit of entrepreneurial activity. This paper examines the barriers middle managers face in trying to be entrepreneurial in less supportive environments, the ethical consequences that can result, and a suggested assessment and training program for averting such dilemmas. We advise companies that embrace corporate entrepreneurship: (1) establish the needed flexibility, innovation, and employee initiative and risk-taking; (2) remove the barriers that the entrepreneurial middle manager may face to more closely align personal and organizational initiatives and reduce the need to behave unethically; and (3) include an ethical component to corporate training which will provide guidelines for instituting compliance and values components into the state-of-the-art corporate entrepreneurship programs.     

Corporate Social Responsibility in SMEs: A Shift from Philanthropy to Institutional Works?

For Aristotle, virtues are neither transcendent nor universal, but socially interdependent; they need to be understood chronologically and with respect to character and context. This paper uses an Aristotelian lens to analyse an especially interesting context in which to study virtue—the state’s response when social order breaks down. During such periods, questions relating to right action by citizens, the state, and state agents are pronounced. To study this, we analyse data from interviews, observation, and documents gathered during a 3-year study of riot policing in the U.K. In doing so, we contribute by joining a number of other conversations within JBE, suggesting detailed empirical examination of this context is useful in opening up considerations relevant to ‘virtue’ elsewhere. This extreme context helps us raise interesting and empirically informed questions that can encourage future theoretical and empirical contributions to virtue in business ethics. One such question is on the role of habituation in virtue, which is not just the inculcation of a reflex or automaticity, but can also refer to a trained and developed tendency to behave in the right way, for the right reasons, at the right time. Whilst we stop short of a simplistic alignment of habituation and virtue, we show ways in which it can inform understanding of both courage and phronēsis.     

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.     

Vice or Virtue? The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Executive Compensation

We empirically examine the impact of corporate social responsibility (CSR) on CEO compensation using a large sample of the US firms from 1996 to 2010. We develop and test two hypotheses, the overinvestment hypothesis based on agency theory and the conflict–resolution hypothesis based on stakeholder theory. We find that the lag of CSR adversely affects both total compensation and cash compensation, after controlling for various firm and board characteristics. Our estimates show that an interquartile increase in CSR is followed by a 4.35% (2.78%) decrease in total (cash) compensation. We also find an inverse association between lagged employee relations and CEO compensation. Our results are robust to the correction for endogeneity using instrumental variable approach. Taken together, our results support the conflict–resolution hypothesis, but not the CSR overinvestment argument.