Business Case For Corporate Social Responsibility Research Articles

Corporate Social Responsibility as Core Competence for the Business Model of Social Start-Ups in the Netherlands

Little is known about how social enterprises and social start-ups compete with the bigger players on the market. It could be reasoned that social start-ups gain an advantage by the deployment of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) elements from the early beginning as a part of their core competences. The aim of this paper is to investigate if CSR elements can be a core competence and how they can contribute to the robustness of the business models of social start-ups. Data was gathered by conducting a case study and interviewing four social entrepreneurs in the first half of 2017. The data was analyzed with the help of a framework built upon the CSR pyramid, the business case for CSR and the Canvas business model. The main findings show that the CSR elements economic, ethical and discretionary responsibilities can be a core competence for social start-ups. Moreover, CSR elements can play an important role in the design of social business models. Especially the deployment of interrelationships between the CSR elements seems to be effective in designing a robust business model of a social start-up.

The business case for CSR: A trump card against hypocrisy?

Why do many companies use a business case frame when referring to their Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) activities? Two experiments (N = 1687) show that using a business case frame makes for a better impression management strategy than moral frames. By signaling that CSR activities are driven by instrumental reasons, and therefore not diagnostic of a company's moral character, a business case frame (and also a hybrid frame) suppresses accusations of hypocrisy. Consequently, when companies do not appear fully committed to CSR, using a business case frame makes them seem less hypocritical and elicits more favorable social evaluations, compared to using a moral frame. When companies appear committed to CSR, business case, hybrid and moral frames elicit similarly positive evaluations. These results support our theorizing that the rhetorical frames used when referring to CSR are not cheap talk, but constitute costly signals because they affect how companies are subsequently evaluated.

The Business Case for CSR: A Trump Card against Hypocrisy?

Why do many companies talk about Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in terms of a business case? We show that from a company’s perspective, using a pragmatic business case frame makes for a good...

Top executives' perceptions of the inclusion of corporate social responsibility in quality management

AbstractExercise of global responsibility is critical to the future of quality practices in business, and corporate social responsibility (CSR) is relevant to the quality movement. However, not much is known about management perceptions of CSR in the specific context of quality management. This paper examines top executives' views on CSR and quality management implemented through the European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) framework. We report the results of a survey of executives in a multinational corporation operating in the outsourcing and technology services industry. The main factors influencing managerial perceptions were value generation, industry forces, institutional and stakeholder pressures, and organizational values and beliefs. In contrast to previous studies, we found limited evidence supporting the influence of shareholder pressures, competition, or the business case for CSR. We concluded that company lifecycle, changes in ownership structure, and owners' orientation toward CSR influenced its potential for adoption through implementation of the EFQM quality framework.

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Practices of the Largest Seafood Suppliers in the Wild Capture Fisheries Sector: From Vision to Action

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) in the seafood industry is on the rise. Because of increasing public awareness and non-governmental organization (NGO) campaigns, seafood buyers have made various commitments to improve the sustainability of their wild seafood sourcing. As part of this effort, seafood suppliers have developed their own CSR programs in order to meet buyers’ sourcing requirements. However, the CSR of these companies, many of which are mid-supply chain or vertically integrated, remain largely invisible and unstudied. In order to better understand how mid-chain seafood suppliers engage in sustainability efforts, we reviewed the CSR practices of the 25 largest seafood companies globally (by revenue) that deal with wild seafood products. Based on literature, existing frameworks, and initial data analysis, we developed a structured framework to identify and categorize practices based on the issues addressed and the approach used. We found companies implement CSR to address four key areas, and through various activities that fit into five categories: Power; Practices; Partnerships; Public policy; and Philanthropy. One of the biggest gaps identified in this study is the lack of accountability mechanisms, as well as robust and consistent accounting of impacts. Indeed, many companies express commitments without clear goals and structures in place to ensure implementation. Therefore, improvements in seafood company performance on social and environmental aspects may not only require creating a better business case for CSR, but also require ensuring that companies have the necessary processes and structures in place through public oversights and regulations.

The Dark Side of Stakeholder Reactions to Corporate Social Responsibility: Tensions and Micro‐level Undesirable Outcomes

AbstractWith a review of literature on corporate social responsibility (CSR) and its micro‐level impacts, this paper proposes an integrative framework to map undesirable relational outcomes of CSR activities on internal (employees) and external (customers) stakeholders. By adopting a paradox‐based perspective, the authors determine that unexpected, adverse stakeholder reactions to CSR are driven primarily by either performing or belonging tensions, related to exchange‐ and identity‐based stakeholder concerns, respectively. Specifically, contextual and personal influences can trigger and explain undesirable relational outcomes of CSR. On this basis, this paper offers a research agenda for developing a more refined understanding of CSR‐related tensions and a more nuanced perspective on the business case for CSR.

The role of corporate social responsibility in creating a Seussian world of seafood sustainability

AbstractApproaches to counter the overfishing and aquaculture production crisis include those imposed by public governing bodies, as well as those implemented by businesses and non‐governmental organizations (NGOs). In the case of the latter, private actors govern fisheries consumption and production through corporate social responsibility (CSR). In this contribution, we focus on three key tools that businesses are increasingly turning towards in an effort to meet the one particular CSR goal of sustainable seafood sourcing. In this context, the key tools of certifications, fisheries improvement projects (FIPs) and traceability are reviewed, and their potential as well as limits in contributing to continual improvement in pursuit of global seafood sustainability are analyzed. We argue that seafood CSR has created its own whimsical and fantastical world, a Seussian world, in which company image has become more important than sustainability performance. We posit four important barriers that must be overcome to bring seafood CSR back to reality. Specifically, we suggest moving away from the business case for CSR, reducing accessibility barriers for small‐scale and developing world fisheries, reconciling different labels and sustainability concepts, and better recognizing the imperative role of the state in governing fisheries and seafood.

Introducing CSR - The Missing Ingredient in the Land Reform Recipe?

In reaction to the unequal land ownership brought about by decades of apartheid, the first democratically elected government embarked on an extensive land reform programme - a programme consisting of the three constitutionally protected pillars: restitution, redistribution and tenure reform. The aim of this programme is not only to provide for restitution to persons who lost their land as a result of racially based measures, but also provide previously disadvantaged South Africans with access to land in order to address the unequal land ownership. This research focuses on the restitution and redistribution pillars of the land reform programme.
 
 The progress made in terms of both these sub-programmes has been disappointing. With reference to redistribution the government has set the target to redistribute 30% of white owned commercial agricultural land to black persons by 2014. To date, less than 10% of this target has been achieved and all indications are that the overwhelming majority of land which has been redistributed is not being used productively or have fallen into a state of total neglect. The state of the redistributed land can be attributed to a variety of causes, with the main cause being the government's inability to provide proper post-settlement support to land reform beneficiaries.
 
 Against this background it is clear that alternative options have to be identified in order to improve the result of land reform. This article identifies corporate social responsibility (CSR) as one of the missing ingredients in the recipe for a successful land reform programme. The article introduces CSR and discusses the business case for CSR; identifies its benefits; considers its possible limitations; and examines the major drivers behind the notion. From the discussion of these topics it will become evident that an assumption of social responsibility by businesses in especially the agricultural sector might contribute to an improved land reform programme.

Ideology and the Micro-foundations of CSR: Why Executives Believe in the Business Case for CSR and how this Affects their CSR Engagements

Existing research on executives’ belief in the business case for corporate social responsibility (CSR) is built on two premises. The first is that, in order to believe in the business case, executi...

Corporate sustainability and responsibility toward education

PurposeThis paper aims to deliberate on how corporate social responsibility (CSR) ought to be reconceived for better educational outcomes. It suggests that there are win-win opportunities for corporations and national governments to nurture human capital and address any skill gaps and mismatches in the labour market.Design/methodology/approachThe businesses’ involvement in setting curriculum programmes may help to improve the quality and effectiveness of extant educational systems. This contribution reports on how different organisations are already engaging in responsible behaviours with varying degrees of intensity and success across many contexts.FindingsMany firms are often training and sponsoring individuals to pursue further studies for their career advancement. It also indicated that there are businesses that are engaging in laudable behaviours to attract prospective employees. Moreover, this paper contends that the provision of education, professional development and training will boost the employees’ morale and job satisfaction, which may, in turn, lead to lower staff turnover rates and greater productivity levels in workplace environments.Social implicationsThis contribution implies that organisational cultures and their business ethos could be attuned with the governments’ educational policies to actively respond to the diverse needs of today’s learners and tomorrow’s human resources.Originality/valueThere is a business case for CSR as the corporations’ strategies realign their economic success with societal progress. Arguably, there is potential that such responsible behaviours can bring reputational benefits, enhance the firms’ image among external stakeholders and could lead to a favourable climate of trust and cooperation within the company itself.

Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility (CSR) in Thailand

Purpose– The purpose of this paper is to understand the business case for corporate social responsibility (CSR) in Thailand by focusing on the consumer-organisational relationship and test the conceptual framework of Duet al.(2007).Design/methodology/approach– A quantitative study was conducted using a mall intercept survey of 184 Thai mobile phone service provider consumers in Bangkok, Thailand.Findings– A CSR emphasised brand is more likely than non-CSR emphasised brands to accrue consumer CSR awareness, positive attitude to company motivations and beliefs in the CSR of that company. Although beliefs are associated with consumers’ greater identification and advocacy behaviours towards the CSR emphasised brand than the non-CSR emphasised brands, they are not associated with loyalty.Practical implications– The paper provides potential guidance for companies to more effectively position and communicate their CSR activities to create differential advantages.Originality/value– Findings of the study demonstrate some support for a business case for CSR in Thailand.

Asymmetric Information and Corporate Social Responsibility

This article addresses the question whether companies benefit from their commitment to corporate social responsibility (CSR). The authors argue that firms which score high on CSR activities build investor confidence and find evidence that they benefit from lower information asymmetry. The authors measure information asymmetry by insider trading, which is defined as the trading of a company’s shares by corporate insiders who have an information advantage with the aim to reap gains or avoid losses. Using a sample of U.S. firms listed in the MSCI World Index during the period 2004 to 2013 and the firm- and industry-level CSR rating from Global Engagement Service (GES), the authors show that insider transactions in firms with a high score on CSR activities lead to lower abnormal returns. This investigation extends current literature on the business case for CSR by explaining the influence of CSR activities on asymmetric information.

Asymmetric Information and Corporate Social Responsibility

This article addresses the question whether companies benefit from their commitment to corporate social responsibility (CSR). The authors argue that firms which score high on CSR activities build investor confidence and find evidence that they benefit from lower information asymmetry. The authors measure information asymmetry by insider trading, which is defined as the trading of a company’s shares by corporate insiders who have an information advantage with the aim to reap gains or avoid losses. Using a sample of U.S. firms listed in the MSCI World Index during the period 2004 to 2013 and the firm- and industry-level CSR rating from Global Engagement Service (GES), the authors show that insider transactions in firms with a high score on CSR activities lead to lower abnormal returns. This investigation extends current literature on the business case for CSR by explaining the influence of CSR activities on asymmetric information.

Justifying the Market Economy: Why Executives Believe in the Business Case for CSR

Upper echelons research on corporate social responsibility (CSR) argues that those executives who believe in the business case for CSR lead their firms towards greater CSR engagements than other ex...

Sustaining the Financial Value of Global CSR: Reconciling Corporate and Stakeholder Interests in a Less Regulated Environment

AbstractIn this article we examine the association between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and firm value. This line of research is important since firms continue to invest in CSR even though past studies reveal a limited linkage between financial value and CSR. However, the business case for CSR or “doing good while making a profit,” appears to be advancing within the business ethics literature as a preferred conception of CSR. We conjecture that the greater unification and refinement of both profit maximization and stakeholder interests through corporate acts, not statements alone, will sustain the financial value of CSR in a less regulated global business environment. We study the triangle of what companies say, what companies do, and firm financial performance. We analyze Fortune 250 firms and find a positive association between what companies do based on KLD Research and Analytics, Inc. (KLD) ratings, and what companies state about ethics in their CSR statements. We then employ regression analysis and find that companies’ socially responsible acts are positively associated with overall firm value and financial performance. Yet we do not find a statistically significant association between what companies say regarding ethics in their CSR statements and their financial outcomes. These results suggest that firm value and financial performance is associated with what companies do and not what they say. Our results seem to be driven by multinational corporations (MNCs) and not by non‐MNCs. This is possibly because MNCs generally operate in a less regulated global business environment that often necessitates strong ethical corporate leadership to further stakeholder interests. Overall, these results help reconcile corporate and stakeholder objectives since evidence of a link between financial performance and doing good sustains global CSR.

Great Expectations! Analyzing the evolving discourse and practice of Corporate Social Responsibility

The turn of the new millennium saw considerable anticipation of improved business engagement with social and environmental responsibility. In this paper, we unearth key themes within the discourse of corporate social responsibility (CSR) as seen in the academic literature and among leading business practitioners and contrast these with the findings of a longitudinal analysis of trends in firm engagement with CSR which demonstrates the very modest progress made in this arena over the same period. Subsequently, we critically examine evidence in respect of the business case for CSR and draw a number of implications for research, practice, and public policy.

Doing Well by Doing Good? Rights and Regulation on Twitter

Web 2.0 platforms promise to act as public fora, connecting people from all over the globe so that they can discuss the issues that matter to them. Yet the commercial imperatives immanent to contemporary networked sociality have been increasingly enforced by Terms of Service contracts that circumscribe users’ rights. In this way, Web 2.0 services have become quasi-regulators, with contract law outpacing state legislation around issues such as informational privacy and intellectual property. In attempting to balance this regulatory aspect of their commercial role and gain social acceptance, Web 2.0 companies often invoke the concept of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). For instance, Twitter.com frames its mandate in benevolent terms, according to the logic of CSR, in statements such as: 'We believe that the open exchange of information can have a positive global impact'.1 Since internet corporations like Twitter often do have such a far-reaching social impact online, CSR policies work to reassure users that their rights as citizens, and not just as consumers, will retain some degree of institutional protection. Much of the time, however, CSR works as a mere marketing tool. This can be seen across a range of popular Web 2.0 platforms, including YouTube, Facebook, Second Life and Twitter, that profit from offering users free access to their services. Political trends toward deregulation and privatization enable such platforms to integrate user-generated content without much constraint from state legislation, and thus Terms of Service contracts regulate the appropriation of users’ free labor, the collection and use of their personal information, and the licensing of their intellectual property. This paper uses the example of Twitter to highlight how a Web 2.0 platform, initially praised for its promise to bolster democratic speech by offering users a free 'real-time information network,' has mobilized the CSR ethos as part of developing its market share. An examination of Twitter’s Terms of Service and Privacy Policy indicates how the site’s positioning of itself as a benevolent social service has not precluded it from retaining a license over all posted content and from collecting and using personal information. In fact, Twitter’s seeming benevolence has rendered the site hugely successful in terms of accumulating the critical mass of users necessary to contribute their free labor toward the site’s growing value. Twitter thus presents a classic example of what business ethics literature calls the “business case for CSR”: the theoretical assumption that a company will 'do well by doing good', meaning that there is an economic incentive to ethically sound behavior. The problem with this over-simplified approach is that it only takes into account economic self-interest. It thus fails to properly reflect on the rights and responsibilities of corporate actors with regards to their stakeholders and society at large (Ulrich 2008). From an ethical perspective, a more adequate approach to corporate responsibility is the language of rights (Wettstein 2008). In this context, we ask, what might be the role of business ethics or other normative frames around the protection of user rights in Web 2.0? And if Web 2.0 sites like Twitter have become the new regulators, what mechanisms could be put in place to increase user autonomy and control over their labor time, personal information and intellectual property? While answers might be speculative here, these questions are important to ask in terms of realizing something of what is at least a democratic potential of participatory Web 2.0 platforms.

Green is Good but Usability is Better: Consumer Reactions to Environmental Initiatives in Web-based Electronic Services

There is an emerging consensus in the corporate social responsibility (CSR) literature suggesting that the quest for the so-called business case for CSR should be abandoned. In the same vein, several researchers have suggested that future research should start examining not whether, but rather when CSR is likely to have strengthened, weakened or even nullified effects on organizational outcomes (e.g. Margolis et al., 2007; Kiron et al., 2012). Using perspectives from several theoretical frameworks (Needs Theory, Technology Acceptance Theory, and Psychological Distance Theory), we contribute to the literature by empirically examining the tension between functional and sustainability attributes in a novel context, namely that of green Information Systems (IS), in the context of e-banking services. The findings indicate that the positive effect of CSR on users’ attitudes towards green e-banking services is moderated by two primarily utilitarian IS factors – namely perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness – and an important utilitarian individual difference variable – namely perceived self-efficacy with technology. Our findings are also important if interpreted within the context of the ethical decision-making literature (e.g. O’Fallon and Butterfield, 2005), as they indicate that the linkage between moral judgment and moral outcomes is unlikely to be that straightforward.

CSR in SMEs: Exploring a Marketing Correlation in Indian SMEs

In any company, giving a high priority to Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is no longer seen as an unproductive cost or resource burden. In fact, it is seen as a means to enhance reputation and credibility among stakeholders, something on which success or even survival may depend. There is a marked transformation in how CSR is being viewed not only among large companies but the small and medium enterprises (SMEs) as well. It is increasingly clear that there is indeed a business case for CSR as much in SMEs as in larger organizations. Most SMEs are ownership driven and hence have a personalised style of managing their enterprises. Unlike larger organizations that principally drive interrelationships among their stakeholders and value chain, the SMEs strive on these interrelationships. Their contribution to responsible behaviour is typically governed by systems within their supply chain and may vary as per the expectation and demands from time to time. Although there is no exact way to measure the benefits of CSR in economic terms, there is no doubt that CSR helps in bringing about improvements in the competitiveness of firms and in improving stakeholder relations. This paper is a study of the CSR practices of 30 small-size companies drawn from different sectors in India. The empirical analysis shows a high level of incidence of CSR in these SMEs, particularly on the factors that translate into marketing benefits. Thus, the practice of CSR is seen to both correlate and contribute to the marketing efforts of the SMEs. In other words, CSR is gaining importance as a marketing instrument and a key to performance improvement within an organization, may it be large, medium, or small.

Self-regulation, Corporate Social Responsibility, and the Business Case: Do they Work in Achieving Workplace Equality and Safety?

The political shift toward an economic liberalism in many developed market economies, emphasizing the importance of the marketplace rather than government intervention in the economy and society (Dorman, Systematic Occupational Health and Safety Management: Perspectives on an International Development, 2000; Tombs, Policy and Practice in Health and Safety 3(1):24–25, 2005; Walters, Policy and Practice in Health and Safety 03(2):3–19, 2005), featured a prominent discourse centered on the need for business flexibility and competitiveness in a global economy (Dorman, 2000; Tombs, 2005). Alongside these developments was an increasing pressure for corporate social responsibility (CSR). The business case for CSR – that corporations would benefit from voluntarily being socially responsible – was increasingly promoted by governments and corporations as part of the justification for self-regulation. The aim of the article is to examine more closely the proposition that self-regulation is effective, with particular reference to the business case for workplace equality and safety. Based on a comprehensive literature review and documentary analysis, it was found that current predominant management discourse and practice focusing on diversity and safety management systems (OHSMS) resonate well with a government and corporate preference for the business case and self-regulation. However, the centrality of individual rather than organizational factors in diversity and OHSMS means that systemic discrimination and inherent workplace hazards are downplayed, making it less likely that employers will initiate structural remedies needed for real change. Thus, reliance on the business case in the argument for self-regulation is problematic. In terms of government policy and management practice, the business case needs to be supplemented by strong, proactive legislation, and worker involvement.