An Examination of the Structure of Executive Compensation and Corporate Social Responsibility: A Canadian Investigation

We explore the extent to which Boards use executive compensation to incite firms to act in accordance with social and environmental objectives (e.g., Johnson, R. and D. Greening: 1999, Academy of Management Journal 42(5), 564–578 ; Kane, E. J.: 2002, Journal of Banking and Finance 26, 1919–1933.). We examine the association between executive compensation and corporate social responsibility (CSR) for 77 Canadian firms using three key components of executives’ compensation structure: salary, bonus, and stock options. Similar to prior research (McGuire, J., S. Dow and K. Argheyd: 2003, Journal of Business Ethics 45(4), 341–359), we measure three different aspects of CSR, which include Total CSR as well as CSR Strengths and CSR Weaknesses. CSR Strengths and CSR Weaknesses capture the positive and negative aspects of CSR, respectively. We find significant positive relationships between: (1) Salary and CSR Weaknesses, (2) Bonus and CSR Strengths, (3) Stock Options and Total CSR; and (4) Stock Options and CSR Strengths. Our findings suggest the importance of the structure of executive compensation in encouraging socially responsible actions, particularly for larger Canadian firms. This in turn suggests that executive compensation can be an effective tool in aligning executives’ welfare with that of the “common good”, which results in more socially responsible firms (Bebchuk, L., J. Fried and D. Walker: 2002, The University of Chicago Law Review 69, 751–846; Zalewski, D.: 2003, Journal of Economic Issues 37(2), 503–509). In addition, our findings suggest the importance of institutional context in influencing the association between executive compensation and CSR. Further implications for practice and research are discussed.Lois. Mahoney is an Assistant Professor at Eastern Michigan University. Her research is focused in the areas of ethics and accounting information systems. She has published in ethics and accounting journals including Journal of Business Ethics, Business Ethics Quarterly, Research on Professional Responsibility and Ethics in Accounting, Information and Organization. Dr. Mahoney has received several research awards, including Best Paper award at the Seventh Symposium on Ethics Research in Accounting. Dr. Mahoney is also actively involved in the American Accounting Association.Linda Thorn is an Associate Professor at York University in Toronto Ontario. Her research focuses on ethical decision making, the ethics of accountants and accounting students and ethical aspects of accounting information. She has published in ethics and accounting journal including among others, Business Ethics Quarterly, Journal of Business Ethics, Contemporary Accounting Research, Behavioral Research in Accounting and Audit: A Journal of Practice in Theory.     

Attitudes About Corporate Social Responsibility: Business Student Predictors

Four predictors were posited to affect business student attitudes about the social responsibilities of business, also known as corporate social responsibility (CSR). Applying Forsyth’s (1980, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 39, 175–184, 1992, Journal of Business Ethics 11, 461–470) personal moral philosophy model, we found that ethical idealism had a positive relationship with CSR attitudes, and ethical relativism a negative relationship. We also found materialism to be negatively related to CSR attitudes. Spirituality among business students did not significantly predict CSR attitudes. Understanding the relationship between CSR attitudes and the significant predictors has important implications for researchers and teachers in particular.     

Ethical Mindsets: An Australian Study

This article investigates the development of research in the field of CSR in China. The justification for this is that (i) there is evidence that CSR is emerging as a management practice and management field internationally; (ii) there is a general interest in the distinctiveness or comparability of management and management research in Asia and China; (iii) there is evidence that CSR is growing as a management issue in China; and (iv) yet, the mainsprings of this are very different from those in Western business systems. This article adopts a methodology used in wider analysis of CSR in management research (Lockett et al., Journal of Management Studies 43, 2006, 115) to bring forth comparisons over the salience, focus and nature of CSR in China research. It finds a rapidly growing salience of CSR in China research, albeit from a low base. It parallels Lockett et al.’s (2006) finding of a ‘thickening’ of CSR research focus from early concerns with Ethical issues only to greater attention to Social, Environmental and Stakeholder concerns. It also generally parallels Lockett et al.’s (2006) findings on the balance of research methodologies deployed. The significance of the findings for future CSR research in China is considered both for the notion of a CSR field of research and for our understanding of the development of CSR in China.     

CSR Practices and Corporate Strategy: Evidence from a Longitudinal Case Study

This paper aims to contribute to the present debate about business ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) that the Journal of Business Ethics is hosting. Numerous contributions argued theoretical frameworks and taxonomies of CSR practices. The authors want to ground in this knowledge and provide further evidence about how companies adopt CSR practices to address stakeholders’ claims and consolidate their trust. Evidence was provided by a longitudinal case study about an Italian food company that is one of the largest producers of baby food. This company reshaped its corporate strategy along three decades through the adoption of CSR practices in order to win stakeholders’ trust about food safety and supply chain behaviour. The empirical exercise was informed by a literature review of the relevant contributions in terms of CSR business practices and levels of efforts to adopt them. In light of this review, the authors adopted for the research framework the taxonomy of business practices proposed by Spiller (2000, “Ethical Business and Investment: A Model for Business and Society”, Journal of Business Ethics 27, 149-160) and the levels of commitment towards CSR proposed by Stahl and Grigsby (1997, Strategic Management; Total Quality & Global Competition (Blackwell, Oxford)). The main findings are discussed in order to argue theoretical implications and identify further areas of research and debate.     

Is Corporate Responsibility Converging? A Comparison of Corporate Responsibility Reporting in the USA, UK, Australia, and Germany

Corporate social reporting, while not mandatory in most countries, has been adopted by many large companies around the world and there are now a variety of competing global standards for non-financial reporting, such as the Global Reporting Initiative and the UN Global Compact. However, while some companies (e.g., Henkel, BHP, Johnson and Johnson) have a long standing tradition in reporting non-financial information, other companies provide only limited information, or in some cases, no information at all. Previous studies have suggested that there are, country and industry-specific, differences in the extent of CSR reports (e.g., Kolk et al.: 2001, Business Strategy and the Environment 10, 15–28; Kolk: 2005, Management International Review 45, 145–166; Maignan and Ralston: 2002, Journal of International Business Studies 33(3), 497–514). However, findings are inconclusive or contradictory and it is often difficult to compare previous studies owing to the idiosyncratic methods used in each study (Graafland et al.: 2004, Journal of Business Ethics 53, 137–152). Furthermore, previous studies have relied mainly on simple measures, such as word counts and page counts of reports, to compare the extent of reporting that may not capture significant differences in the content of the reports. In this article, we seek to overcome some of these deficiencies by using textual analysis software and a more robust statistical method to more objectively and reliably compare the CSR reports of firms in different industries and countries. We examine a sample of leading companies in four countries (US, UK, Australia, and Germany) and test whether or not membership of the Global Compact makes a difference to CSR reporting and is overcoming industry and country specific factors that limit standardization. We conclude that GlobalCompact membership is having an effect only in certain areas of CSR reporting, related to the environment and workers, and that businesses from different countries vary significantly in the extent to which they promote CSR and the CSR issues that they choose to emphasize in their reports. These country differences are argued to be related to the different institutional arrangements in each country.     

Public Policies on Corporate Social Responsibility: The Role of Governments in Europe

Over the last decade, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has been defined first as a concept whereby companies decide voluntarily to contribute to a better society and cleaner environment and, second, as a process by which companies manage their relationship␣with stakeholders (European Commission, 2001. Nowadays, CSR has become a priority issue on governments’ agendas. This has changed governments’ capacity to act and impact on social and environmental issues in their relationship with companies, but has also affected the framework in which CSR public policies are designed: governments are incorporating multi-stakeholder strategies. This article analyzes the CSR public policies in European advanced democracies, and more specifically the EU-15 countries, and provides explanatory keys on how governments have understood, designed and implemented their CSR public policies. The analysis has entailed the classification of CSR public policies taking into consideration the actor to which the governments’ policies were addressed. This approach to the analysis of CSR public policies in the EU-15 countries leads us to observe coinciding lines of action among the different countries analyzed, which has enabled us to propose a ‹four ideal’ typology model for governmental action on CSR in Europe: Partnership, Business in the Community, Sustainability, and Citizenship, and Agora. The main contribution of this article is to propose an analytical framework to analyze CSR public policies, which provide a perspective on the relationships between governments, businesses, and civil society stakeholders, and enable us to incorporate the analysis of CSR public policies into a broader approach focused on social governance. Laura Albareda is currently a Research Fellow at the Institute for Social Innovation, ESADE, Universidad Ramon Llull-URL. She is principal researcher and manager of the Observatory on Socially Responsible Investment in Spain. Her areas of research and academic interest are Corporate Social Responsibility, Business Ethics, Global Governance and Public Authorites, Governments and Public Policies on Corporate Social Responsibility and Socially Responsible Investment. Josep M. Lozano is currently Professor & Senior Researcher at the Institute for Social Innovation, ESADE Business School (URL). He is Co-founder of ética, Economía y Dirección (Spanish branch of the EBEN) and member of the editorial board of Ethical Perspectives and Society and Business Review. He was member of the Catalan Government’s Commission on Values, and is member of the Spanish Ministry of Employment and Social Affairs’ Commission of Experts on CSR. He has been a highly commended runner-up in the European Faculty Pioneer Awards of the Beyond Grey Pinstripes and is author of Ethics and Organizations. Understanding Business Ethics as a Learning Process (Kluwer). Tamyko Ysa is an Assistant Professor of the Institute of Public Management, and the Department of Business Policy at ESADE. Her areas of interest are the management of partnerships and their impact on the creation of public value; the design, implementation and evaluation of public policies, and the relations between companies and governments. She is the Principal Researcher of the Research Group for Leadership and Innovation in Public Management (GLIGP). She is coauthor of Governments and Corporate Social Responsibility (Palgrave MacMillan).     

A Three Country Comparative Analysis of Managerial CSR Perspectives: Insights From Lebanon,Syria and Jordan

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a concept that has acquired a new resonance in the global economy. With the advent of globalization, managers in different contexts have been exposed to the notion of CSR and are being pressured to adopt CSR initiatives. Yet, in view of vastly differing national cultures and institutional realities, mixed orientations to CSR continue to be salient in different contexts, oscillating between the classical perspective which considers CSR as a burden on competitiveness and the modern perspective that views CSR as instrumental for business success. Capitalizing on the two-dimensional CSR model developed by Quazi and O’Brien (Journal of Business Ethics 25, 33–51, 2000), this article assesses managerial perspectives towards CSR in three neighboring Middle Eastern countries (Lebanon, Syria and Jordan) through an empirical study involving 333 managers. The findings lend support to the Quazi and O’Brien model (2000), suggesting some commonalities in CSR orientations as well as minor divergences. The findings are discussed and cross-cultural implications drawn accordingly.     

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): Theory and Practice in a Developing Country Context

After providing an overview of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) research in different contexts, and noting the varied methodologies adopted, two robust CSR conceptualizations – one by Carroll (1979, ‘A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance’, The Academy of Management Review 4(4), 497–505) and the other by Wood (1991, ‘Corporate Social Performance Revisited’, The Academy of Management Review 16(4), 691–717) – have been adopted for this research and their integration explored. Using this newly synthesized framework, the research critically examines the CSR approach and philosophy of eight companies that are considered active in CSR in the Lebanese context. The findings suggest the lack of a systematic, focused, and institutionalized approach to CSR and that the understanding and practice of CSR in Lebanon are still grounded in the context of philanthropic action. The findings are qualified within the framework of existing contextual realities and relevant implications drawn accordingly. Dr. Jamali is Assistant Professor of Management at the Olayan School of Business, American University of Beirut. She holds a BA in Public Administartion from the American University of Beirut, and a Ph.D. in Social Policy and Administration, from the University of Kent at Canterbury, UK. Her research interests encompass corporate social responsibility, public private partnerships, learning organizations and women issues. She worked as an expert consultant on projects funded by the World Bank, the US Agency for International Development, NGOs, and other regional and local public and private firms. She is the author of numerous studies and international peer reviewed publications in various international journals, including the Journal of Management Development, the International Journal of Public Sector Management, the International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Business Process Management Journal, Public Works, Management and Policy and Women in Management Review. Ramez Mirshak Graduated with honors from the American University in Cairo (AUC) with a Bachelor of Arts in Business Administration in February 2001, then worked for two years in Egypt in the field of marketing and management. In 2004–2005, pursued his Masters of Business Administration at the American University of Beirut (AUB), researching primarily issues relating to change management and corporate social responsibility under the supervision of Dr. Dima Jamali, then joined a leading international financial institution as a regional Management Associate, while maintaining links with AUB and working on several research based projects.     

Determinants of Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure Ratings by Spanish Listed Firms

The aim of this paper is to analyze whether a number of firm and industry characteristics, as well as media exposure, are potential determinants of corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure practices by Spanish listed firms. Empirical studies have shown that CSR disclosure activism varies across companies, industries, and time (Gray et al., Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 8(2), 47–77, 1995; Journal of Business Finance & Accounting 28(3/4), 327–356, 2001; Hackston and Milne, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 9(1), 77–108, 1996; Cormier and Magnan, Journal of International Financial Management and Accounting 1(2), 171–195, 2003; Cormier et al., European Accounting Review 14(1), 3–39, 2005), which is usually justified by reference to several theoretical constructs, such as the legitimacy, stakeholder, and agency theories. Our findings evidence that firms with higher CSR ratings present a statistically significant larger size and a higher media exposure, and belong to more environmentally sensitive industries, as compared to firms with lower CSR ratings. However, neither profitability nor leverage seem to explain differences in CSR disclosure practices between Spanish listed firms. The most influential variable for explaining firms’ variation in CSR ratings is media exposure, followed by size and industry. Therefore, it seems that the legitimacy theory, as captured by those variables related to public or social visibility, is the most relevant theory for explaining CSR disclosure practices of Spanish listed firms.     

Listen to the voice of the customer—First steps towards stakeholder democracy

Recently, calls have grown louder for more stakeholder democracy that is, letting stakeholders participate in the process of organizing, decision‐making, and governance in corporations, especially in the area of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) activities. Despite the relevance of the subject, the impact of customer involvement in CSR on their company‐related attitudes and behaviors still represents a major research void. The paper at hand develops a conceptual framework of consumer involvement in CSR based on the existing literature, theories of stakeholder democracy, and organizational boundaries as well as drawing from the qualitative focus group interviews (N = 24). The framework is tested on a large scale, two‐time point field‐experimental study (N = 3,397). More specifically, consumer reactions to three degrees of customer involvement (i.e., information, feedback, and dialogue) are tested in two different CSR domains (i.e., company‐internal business process vs. company‐external philanthropic CSR). Results indicate that the customer involvement in CSR has a more beneficial effect in terms of strengthening customer outcomes in CSR domains that directly affect external stakeholders of the company (i.e., philanthropic CSR) than in domains that mainly concern company‐internal stakeholders (i.e., business process CSR).     

The Agency Problems Embedded in Firm’s Equity Investment

We find that agency problems are embedded in firm’s excess and abnormal equity investments that are mainly dictated by controlling shareholder’s motives and ethical choices manifested in ownership and board structure. The excess equity investment is gauged with respect to industry average. The abnormal equity investment is specifically referred to the number of nominal investment companies that are fully controlled by the controlling owners while subject to little governance. Our empirical evidences of 345 Taiwanese non-financial listed firms show that firm’s excess and abnormal equity investments are negatively correlated with controlling shareholder’s cash flow rights while are positively correlated with the control–cash flow deviation, and board affiliation. The results are supportive of the positive incentive hypothesis and the negative entrenchment hypothesis put forth by La Porta et al. (2002, Journal of Finance 57, 1147–1171) and Claessen et al. (2002, Journal of Finance 57, 2741–2742). The negative relation between equity investment and firm’s value further supports the agency postulation that corporate excess and abnormal equity investments represent a leeway for controlling shareholder to exploit wealth of minority shareholders. This study potentially contributes to the literature of business ethics by portraying an empirically testable linkage from controlling owner’s ethical choices to his actions and therefore firm’s value. Yin-Hua Yeh, Ph.D., is Professor and Director of the Graduate Institute of Finance at Fu-Jen Catholic University (FJU) in Taiwan. He is also the Director of the Center for Corporate Governance and Business Ethics at FJU. His main research and teaching areas are corporate governance, corporate finance, and merger and acquisition. Tsun-Siou Lee, Ph.D., is Professor of Finance at National Taiwan University. His main research and teaching areas are corporate governance, futures and options, and financial innovation. Pei-Gi Shu, Ph.D., is Professor of Business Administration at Fu-Jen Catholic University in Taiwan. He is also the Vice Dean of Management College at FJU. His main research and teaching areas are mutual funds and behavioral finance.     

Undivided Corporate Responsibility: Towards a Theory of Corporate Integrity

In the years since Enron corporate social responsibility, or “CSR,” has become a ubiquitous phenomenon in both research and business practice. CSR is used as an umbrella term to describe much of what is done in terms of ethics-related activities in firms around the globe to such an extent that some consider it a “tortured concept” (Godfrey and Hatch 2007, Journal of Business Ethics 70, 87–98). Addressing this skepticism, I argue in this article that the focus on CSR is indeed problematic for three main reasons: (1) the term carries a lot of historical baggage – baggage that is not necessarily conducive to the clarity of the concept; (2) it is the object of increasing ethical instrumentalism; and (3) given the multiple ethical challenges that corporations face, and given the fact that the “social” responsibilities of business are but one set of corporate responsibilities, a suitable term would have to be more inclusive and integrative. I therefore suggests moving instead toward a sound definition of corporate integrity and aim in this article to develop a working definition by fleshing out “7 Cs” of integrity: commitment, conduct, content, context, consistency, coherence, and continuity. I then discuss how these 7 Cs impact our understanding of CSR or, more broadly, corporate responsibility in general.

On voluntarism and the role of governments in CSR: towards a contingency approach

In the corporate social responsibility (CSR) literature, the principle of voluntarism is predominant and implies that responsible business activities are discretionary and reach beyond the rule of law. This principle fails to explain that governments have a great interest in CSR and exercise influence on firms’ CSR activities. Therefore, we argue in favour of a contingency approach on voluntarism in CSR. To this end, we analyse the academic literature to demonstrate how governments are part of the CSR debate. We selected 703 papers where the impact of governments is mentioned from five journals in our field (BEER, BEQ, BSE, BAS, JBE) in the period 1982–2011. We studied the titles and abstracts of these papers and provide an overview of: (i) the geographical orientation of the reviewed studies; (ii) the variety of government levels involved; and (iii) the various subjects where governments appear to be involved. In addition, an in‐depth reading of a subsample of 39 articles offers more details on the role of governments in the CSR literature. Hence, we offer a structured overview on the discussion of CSR and governments while stimulating a contingent understanding of the voluntarism concept in CSR.     

To Thine Own Self Be True? Employees’ Judgments of the Authenticity of Their Organization’s Corporate Social Responsibility Program

Despite recognizing the importance of developing authentic corporate social responsibility (CSR) programs, noticeably absent from the literature is consideration for how employees distinguish between authentic and inauthentic CSR programs. This is somewhat surprising given that employees are essentially the face of their organization and are largely expected to act as ambassadors for the organization’s CSR program (Collier and Esteban in Bus Ethics 16:19–33, 2007). The current research, by conducting depth interviews with employees, builds a better understanding of how employees differentiate between authentic and inauthentic CSR programs, and how these judgments influence their perceptions of the organization. We find that employees rely on two different referent standards to form authenticity judgments—the extent to which the image put forth in the CSR program aligns with the organization’s true identity and the extent to which the CSR program itself is developmental. To assess the former, employees draw on cues about resource commitment, alignment between elements of the organization’s CSR program, emotional engagement, justice, and embeddedness. The latter assessments are based on the extent to which the organization adopts a leadership role with regards to its CSR initiatives. We also find that perceived authenticity can lead to positive outcomes such as organizational identification and employee connections. This study contributes to the broad literatures on both CSR and authenticity, as well as more specifically adding to the conversation on authenticity as a potentially valuable lens for enriching business ethics theorizing.     

Moving Forward with the Concept of Responsible Leadership: Three Caveats to Guide Theory and Research

Integrating corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives in business is one of the great challenges facing firms today. Societal stakeholders require much more from the firm than pursuing profitability and growth. But these societal stakeholders often simply assume that increased societal expectations can easily be accommodated within efficiently run business operations, without much attention devoted to process issues. We build upon the core–periphery thesis to explore potential avenues for firms to add recurring CSR initiatives to their existing business practices. Based on Siggelkow’s (Admin Sci Quart 47:125–159, 2002) analysis of organizational change, we conceptualize seven major patterns of CSR initiative adoption. We develop a new organizing framework showing how a firm can integrate CSR initiatives in business. Within the new framework, each of the seven patterns represents an idiosyncratic path through which recurring CSR initiatives can be included as practices into conventional operations. We also explore the nature of the resulting internal fit between recurring CSR initiatives and business practices.     

Ambition Versus Conscience, Does Corporate Social Responsibility Pay off? The Application of Matching Methods

In this article, we examine the effect of corporate social responsibility (CSR) on firms’ financial performance (CSR-effect). Two competing hypotheses, social impact hypothesis and shift of focus hypothesis, are proposed to investigate this issue, where the former suggests that CSR has a positive relation with performance and the latter are opposite. In order to ensure the CSR-effect is not contaminated by other factors or samples are randomly drawn, we employ four matching methods, Nearest, Caliper, Mahala and Mahala Caliper to match the samples of CSR (CSR-firms) and without CSR (NonCSR-firms) with similar characteristics. Although four methods yield slightly different results, firms engaging in CSR activities tend to obtain significantly higher values on pretax income to net sales and profit margin, and adopting CSR at the very least not deteriorate the performance of firms, making our conclusion favors the social impact hypothesis and against shift of focus hypothesis in Taiwan. Thus, ambition and conscience are not conflicting with each other.     

Corporate Social Responsibility and Crony Capitalism in Taiwan

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has become increasingly popular in advanced economies in the West. In contrast, CSR awareness in Asia is rather low, both on the corporate and state level. However, recent events have shown that the CSR is receiving more attention by corporations in Asia. Recent development in CSR in Taiwan is one example of such a trend. A 2005 survey on the 700 publicly listed companies in Taiwan on␣CSR has highlighted the current CSR situation. Concurrently, the numbers of corporate scandals and corruption have dramatically increased over the past 6 years. Corporate CSR activities co-existing with pervasive corporate scandals create a phenomenon of contradictions. This article aims to report via the survey findings the current development of business ethics in corporate Taiwan; and to interpret the findings in context of Taiwan’s business ethos, especially its Confucian familism and crony capitalism. Po-Keung Ip, Ph.D., Professor of the Graduate Institute of Philosophy, National Central University, Taiwan. He is concurrently the Institute’s Director of the Applied Ethics Center. His research interests include business ethics, bioethics, and well-being of nations. His recent publications include Constructing a Social Contract for Corporations (2002), Business Ethics – Multistakeholder Responsibilities of the Corporation (2005) (in Chinese). Currently he is working on a book The Challenge of Corporate Social Responsibilities in Chinese Cultural Communities.     

The role of CSR committee characteristics on R&D investments

We investigate the impact of corporate social responsibility (CSR) committees on research and development (R&D) investments. Using a unique sample of European listed companies, we offer three key results to the current academic and policy debate. First, we document that firms with a CSR committee exhibit lower levels of R&D investments. Second, we find that the CSR committee membership of either the CEO or chairman is associated with an increase in R&D investments. Finally, we provide evidence that firms whose CSR committees are chaired by a female director exhibit higher R&D investments. These results are of importance for academics, investors, and policy makers, since they shed light on the effect of CSR board committees on corporate outcomes, beyond their impact on social performance and/or sustainability disclosure.