Does board independence influence CSR performance? A GMM-based dynamic panel data approach

Abstract

PurposeThe study aims to explore and establish the relationship that exists between board independence and corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices of Indian firms.Design/methodology/approachA sample of 76 non-financial companies listed on the National Stock Exchange has been considered for a period of seven years (from 2013 to 2019). The study has used several statistical tools such as the static panel data model and the Arellano–Bond dynamic panel data model based on generalized method of moments approach.FindingsThe results of the analysis have indicated board independence to have a significant positive relationship with the firms’ CSR performance. However, board size and number of board meetings have been found to have a negative relationship with CSR. Further, outcomes have also revealed that variables such as companies’ size and liquidity have a positive effect on the extent of CSR activities performed.Practical implicationsThe firms which have the intention to engage in impactful CSR activities should support the independent directors’ participation in companies’ boards. The study’s findings suggest the companies to appoint independent directors strategically, keeping in mind the requirements of their board. Also, the independent directors selected should be independent in true sense, i.e. they should not be acquaintances of the company’s chief executive officer. This would ensure unbiased decision-making and would enhance the company’s CSR performance.Originality/valueIn India, CSR has gained great importance. So much so that it was made mandatory by the Companies Act, 2013. However, research studies that may assist in understanding the influence of board independence on Indian firms’ CSR performance are still scarce. The present study would foster value to the existing set of limited literature. Besides, the study has considered the dynamic nature of the relationship and has also controlled the endogeneity bias which has been examined by few studies in the past.