Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Corporate Social Performance (corporate + social_performance)
Selected AbstractsA Positive Theory of Moral Management, Social Pressure, and Corporate Social PerformanceJOURNAL OF ECONOMICS & MANAGEMENT STRATEGY, Issue 1 2009David P. Baron This paper provides a theory of firm behavior motivated by moral duty, self-interest, and social pressure. A morally managed and a self-interested firm compete in a market in which their corporate social performance (CSP) provides product differentiation. Some citizens have altruistic or warm glow preferences for products with associated CSP, personal giving to social causes, holding shares in firms providing CSP, and contributing to social pressure to increase CSP. Social pressure is delivered by an activist NGO funded by voluntary contributions by citizens. The model characterizes an equilibrium in the product market, the capital market, and the market for social pressure. The equilibrium establishes a price for CSP and for activist-induced social pressure. The theory provides predictions of the market values of firms, the prices of products, firm profits, target selection, contributions to the activist, and the amount of CSP supplied. For example, if citizens do not distinguish between morally motivated CSP and CSP induced by social pressure, the activist is more likely to target the softer, morally motivated firm. Higher quality activists are better funded, target self-interested firms, and obtain greater corporate social performance. Lower quality activists target morally managed firms. [source] Extrinsic and Intrinsic Drivers of Corporate Social Performance: Evidence from Foreign and Domestic Firms in MexicoJOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, Issue 1 2010Alan Muller abstract The literature on corporate social performance (CSP) is largely split between approaches that consider CSP to be extrinsically driven and those that consider it to be intrinsically driven. While the management literature has paid attention to drivers of both types, the relationship between the two remains largely unstudied, particularly in the international setting. Meanwhile, the international business (IB) literature has addressed the international dimension of CSP more directly, but focuses largely on extrinsic pressures. Our paper links the management and IB literatures by addressing intrinsic drivers (management commitment to ethics) in conjunction with extrinsic (trade-related) drivers for both foreign- and domestically-owned firms in a single-market setting. Using survey data from 121 auto parts suppliers in Mexico, we find that management commitment to ethics is a dominant driver of CSP among both foreign and domestic firms. More importantly, management commitment to ethics interacts positively with trade-related pressures in raising CSP levels. [source] Corporate social performance: Creating resources to help organizations excelGLOBAL BUSINESS AND ORGANIZATIONAL EXCELLENCE, Issue 2 2008Bryan Dennis The most commonly employed theories of corporate social performance (CSP) tend to ignore firm-level processes and structures as sources of competitive advantage. But, by taking a resource-based view (RBV), and by enhancing a firm's capability to engage in socially responsible activities, it can potentially create its own competitive advantages. We examine four major components of CSP,community relations, the environment, diversity, and employee relations. And we show that the ability of a firm to develop its knowledge and skills,as well as policies and implementation plans and procedures,in each of these areas is a potential resource that may in fact provide competitive advantages and higher organizational performance, bringing benefits to both society and the firm. The community dimension evaluates the firm's performance in relationship to philanthropic giving and community support. The environmental aspect considers such firm stewardship activities as pollution prevention, global warming, and recycling. The diversity component measures CSP considering such factors as board member diversity and a firm's hiring, evaluation, training, and promotion policies concerning women and minorities. The employee relations dimension examines such socially responsible human resource practices as innovative employee involvement programs and profit sharing. Together, these capabilities can provide tangible and intangible resources that can provide the firm with competitive advantages. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. [source] Corporate Sustainability Performance and Idiosyncratic Risk: A Global PerspectiveFINANCIAL REVIEW, Issue 2 2009Darren D. Lee G11; G30; Q56 Abstract Does investing in sustainability leaders affect portfolio performance? Analyzing two mutually exclusive leading and lagging global corporate sustainability portfolios (Dow Jones) finds that (1) leading sustainability firms do not underperform the market portfolio, and (2) their lagging counterparts outperform the market portfolio and the leading portfolio. Notably, we find leading (lagging) corporate social performance (CSP) firms exhibit significantly lower (higher) idiosyncratic risk and that idiosyncratic risk might be priced by the broader global equity market. We develop an idiosyncratic risk factor and find that its inclusion significantly reduces the apparent difference in performance between leading and lagging CSP portfolios. [source] Corporate social performance: Creating resources to help organizations excelGLOBAL BUSINESS AND ORGANIZATIONAL EXCELLENCE, Issue 2 2008Bryan Dennis The most commonly employed theories of corporate social performance (CSP) tend to ignore firm-level processes and structures as sources of competitive advantage. But, by taking a resource-based view (RBV), and by enhancing a firm's capability to engage in socially responsible activities, it can potentially create its own competitive advantages. We examine four major components of CSP,community relations, the environment, diversity, and employee relations. And we show that the ability of a firm to develop its knowledge and skills,as well as policies and implementation plans and procedures,in each of these areas is a potential resource that may in fact provide competitive advantages and higher organizational performance, bringing benefits to both society and the firm. The community dimension evaluates the firm's performance in relationship to philanthropic giving and community support. The environmental aspect considers such firm stewardship activities as pollution prevention, global warming, and recycling. The diversity component measures CSP considering such factors as board member diversity and a firm's hiring, evaluation, training, and promotion policies concerning women and minorities. The employee relations dimension examines such socially responsible human resource practices as innovative employee involvement programs and profit sharing. Together, these capabilities can provide tangible and intangible resources that can provide the firm with competitive advantages. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. [source] A Positive Theory of Moral Management, Social Pressure, and Corporate Social PerformanceJOURNAL OF ECONOMICS & MANAGEMENT STRATEGY, Issue 1 2009David P. Baron This paper provides a theory of firm behavior motivated by moral duty, self-interest, and social pressure. A morally managed and a self-interested firm compete in a market in which their corporate social performance (CSP) provides product differentiation. Some citizens have altruistic or warm glow preferences for products with associated CSP, personal giving to social causes, holding shares in firms providing CSP, and contributing to social pressure to increase CSP. Social pressure is delivered by an activist NGO funded by voluntary contributions by citizens. The model characterizes an equilibrium in the product market, the capital market, and the market for social pressure. The equilibrium establishes a price for CSP and for activist-induced social pressure. The theory provides predictions of the market values of firms, the prices of products, firm profits, target selection, contributions to the activist, and the amount of CSP supplied. For example, if citizens do not distinguish between morally motivated CSP and CSP induced by social pressure, the activist is more likely to target the softer, morally motivated firm. Higher quality activists are better funded, target self-interested firms, and obtain greater corporate social performance. Lower quality activists target morally managed firms. [source] Extrinsic and Intrinsic Drivers of Corporate Social Performance: Evidence from Foreign and Domestic Firms in MexicoJOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, Issue 1 2010Alan Muller abstract The literature on corporate social performance (CSP) is largely split between approaches that consider CSP to be extrinsically driven and those that consider it to be intrinsically driven. While the management literature has paid attention to drivers of both types, the relationship between the two remains largely unstudied, particularly in the international setting. Meanwhile, the international business (IB) literature has addressed the international dimension of CSP more directly, but focuses largely on extrinsic pressures. Our paper links the management and IB literatures by addressing intrinsic drivers (management commitment to ethics) in conjunction with extrinsic (trade-related) drivers for both foreign- and domestically-owned firms in a single-market setting. Using survey data from 121 auto parts suppliers in Mexico, we find that management commitment to ethics is a dominant driver of CSP among both foreign and domestic firms. More importantly, management commitment to ethics interacts positively with trade-related pressures in raising CSP levels. [source] Corporate Reputation and Social Performance: The Importance of FitJOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, Issue 3 2006Stephen J. Brammer abstract Utilizing data on a sample of large firms, we estimate a model of corporate reputation. We find reputation, derived from the assessments of managers and market analysts, to be determined by a firm's social performance, financial performance, market risk, the extent of long-term institutional ownership, and the nature of its business activities. Furthermore, the reputational effect of social performance is found to vary both across sectors, and within sectors across the various types of social performance. Specifically, our results demonstrate the need to achieve a ,fit' among the types of corporate social performance undertaken and the firm's stakeholder environment. For example, a strong record of environmental performance may enhance or damage reputation depending on whether the firm's activities ,fit' with environmental concerns in the eyes of stakeholders. [source] The impact of downsizing on the corporate reputation for social performanceJOURNAL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, Issue 1 2004Stelios C. Zyglidopoulos Abstract This paper investigates the impact of downsizing on a firm's reputation for corporate social performance (RCSP). Drawing on the downsizing, corporate reputation and social responsibility literatures, a number of hypotheses concerning the impact of downsizing, and particularly the types of downsizing, on a firm's reputation for corporate social performance are developed and empirically tested. The main findings of this study are that, while downsizing seems to have a negative impact on the firm's RCSP, when one takes into account the kind of managerial action that led to downsizing (layoffs and/or divestitures), this impact differs between the two stakeholder groups, industry executives and financial analysts, which were investigated. This study also found that a high financial performance prior to downsizing led to a greater negative impact on the firm's RCSP. Copyright © 2004 Henry Stewart Publications [source] Moderators of the negativity effect: Commitment, identification, and consumer sensitivity to corporate social performancePSYCHOLOGY & MARKETING, Issue 1 2010Tsung-Chi Liu Numerous studies have identified constructs such as commitment and brand familiarity as moderators of negativity effects. However, boundary conditions for this moderation have yet to be identified within a retailing context. This study tries to rectify this gap in the literature. This study finds that three factors (commitment, consumer,company identification, and consumer sensitivity to corporate social performance) moderate attitude change toward a retailer following exposure to moderately negative (vs. positive) publicity. However, given extremely negative information, the buffering effects of the moderating factors disappear, and attitude changes are significant for all consumers. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. [source] Trust, reputation and corporate accountability to stakeholdersBUSINESS ETHICS: A EUROPEAN REVIEW, Issue 1 2001Tracey Swift This paper explores the relationship between accountability, trust and corporate reputation building. Increasing numbers of corporations are mobilising themselves to put more and more information out into the public domain as a way of communicating with stakeholders. Corporate social accounting and stakeholder engagement is happening on an unprecedented scale. Rather than welcoming such initiatives, academics have been quick to pick faults with contemporary social auditing and reporting, claiming that in its current form it is not about demonstrating accountability at all, but rather about building corporate reputation. Academics argue that ,accountability should hurt', that if accountability is an enjoyable process, then the organisation isn't doing it right. For organisations that are currently engaging with stakeholders and ostensibly becoming more transparent about their corporate social performance, this kind of critique is likely to be bewildering. This paper argues that central to the notion of accountability and to contemporary social accounting practice is the concept of trust. Accountability is based upon a distrust of corporate management, whereas corporate reputation building is about strategically seeking to establish trust in stakeholder relationships in order to negate formal accountability requirements. Using a split trust continuum, the paper seeks to explain and synthesise what seem to be two very different paradigms of organisational transparency. [source] | ||||||||||