The Directions of Interrelations Between the Company’s Performance and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Activities

Robert Zajkowski; Ada Domańska

doi:10.18778/0208-6018.343.13

Authors

Robert Zajkowski Maria Curie-Skłodowska University in Lublin, Faculty of Economics, Department of Banking http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0021-7977
Ada Domańska Maria Curie-Skłodowska University in Lublin, Faculty of Economics, Department of Banking http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8239-4319

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/0208-6018.343.13

Keywords:

family businesses, CSR, Company’s Finance Performance, Corporate Social Performance

Abstract

The interrelations between engagement in CSR activities and the company’s performance are still one of pivotal managerial problems. Ample findings related to this issue seem to reveal a rather hazy than clear picture. In this paper, an attempt has been made to complement this problematic issue with the results of the survey conducted among a group of Polish large and medium‑sized family businesses. The aim of the paper is to analyse relationships between the self‑assessment of the company’s performance and its engagement in various CSR activities. It seems to be interesting to identify what kind of relationship and mutual influences can be found between the company’s economic and non‑economic activities and whether its value aspects, in their broad meaning, exist. To identify this relationship, two groups of linear regression models were adopted (CSR activities or the self‑assessment of the company’s performance as dependent variables). The ultimate conclusion drawn seems to confirm that the problematic area mentioned above should be described rather by a circular than linear direction of influences which were called a multilevel chain of interferences.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Arnold M. F. (2008), Non‑Financial Performance Metrics For Corporate Responsibility Reporting Revisited, A Doughty Centre for Corporate Responsibility Working Paper, Cranfield School of Management, Cranfield.
Google Scholar

Banerjee S. B. (2000), Whose Land is it Anyway? National Interest, Indigenous Stakeholders, and Colonial Discourses, “Organization & Environment”, no. 13, pp. 3–38.
Google Scholar

Barnett M. L. (2007), Stakeholder influence capacity and the variability of financial returns to corporate social response, “Academy of Management Review”, no. 32(3), pp. 794–816.
Google Scholar

Baron R. A., Franklin R. J., Hmieleski K. M. (2016), Why entrepreneurs often experience low, not high, levels of stress: The joint effects of selection and psychological capital, “Journal of Management”, no. 42(3), pp. 742–768.
Google Scholar

Bonaventura J. M.G., Silva S. da, Bandeira‑de‑Mello R. (2012), Corporate Financial Performance and Corporate Social Performance: Methodological Development and the Theoretical Contribution of Empirical Studies, “Revista Contabilidade & Finanças”, no. 23(60), pp. 232–245.
Google Scholar

Bowen H. R. (1953), Social Responsibilities of the Businessman, Harper, New York.
Google Scholar

Brammer S., Millington A. (2008), Does it pay to be different? An analysis of the relationship between corporate social and financial performance, “Strategic Management Journal”, vol. 29, no. 12, pp. 1325–1343.
Google Scholar

Brilman J. (2002), Nowoczesne koncepcje i metody zarządzania, Polskie Wydawnictwo Ekonomiczne, Warszawa.
Google Scholar

Campbell J. L. (2007), Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility, “Academy of Management Review”, no. 32(3), pp. 946–967
Google Scholar

Chuang C. H., Jackson S. E., Jiang Y. (2016), Can knowledge‑intensive teamwork be managed? Examining the roles of HRM systems, leadership, and tacit knowledge, “Journal of Management”, no. 42(2), pp. 524–554.
Google Scholar

Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium‑sized enterprises (2003), OJ L 124 of 20.05.2003.
Google Scholar

Corporate Social Responsibility. A Business Contribution to Sustainable Development (2002), Commission of the European Communities, Brussels, 2.07.2002 COM(2002) 347.
Google Scholar

Criticisms or Drawbacks of Profit Maximization Objectives (2012), https://accountlearning.blogspot.com/2012/12/criticisms-or-drawbacks-of-profit.html [accessed: 26.03.2016].
Google Scholar

Crossan K. (2005), The Theory of the Firm and Alternative Theories of Firm Behaviour: A Critique, “International Journal of Applied Institutional Governance”, vol. 1, issue 1, pp. 1–13.
Google Scholar

Dahlsrud A. (2006), How Corporate Social Responsibility is Defined: an Analysis of 37 Definitions, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, “Wiley Inter Science”, pp. 1–13, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/csr.132 [accessed: 29.04.2017].
Google Scholar

DiSogra C., Callegaro M. (2009), Computing response rates for probability‑based web panels, [in:] Proceedings of the Joint Statistical Meetings, Survey Research Methods section [CD‑ROM].
Google Scholar

Godfrey P., Merrill C., Hansen J. (2009), The relationship between corporate social responsibility and shareholder value: an empirical test of the risk management hypothesis, “Strategic Management Journal”, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 425–445.
Google Scholar

Gruszecki T. (2002), Współczesne teorie przedsiębiorstwa, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, Warszawa.
Google Scholar

Grzegorzewska‑Ramocka E. (2009), Cele ekonomiczne i społeczne przedsiębiorstwa, “Gospodarka Narodowa”, no. 7–8, pp. 59–78.
Google Scholar

Hong B., Li Z., Minor D. (2016), Corporate governance and executive compensation for corporate social responsibility, “Journal of Business Ethics”, no. 136(1), pp. 199–213.
Google Scholar

Hoogendoorn A. W., Daalmans J. (2009), Nonresponse in the Recruitment of an Internet Panel Based on Probability Sampling, “Survey Research Methods”, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 59–72.
Google Scholar

How to Measure Performance: A Handbook of Techniques and Tools (1995), U.S. Department of Energy, Washington.
Google Scholar

Hussain W. (2012), Corporations, Profit Maximization and The Personal Sphere, “Economics and Philosophy”, no. 28, pp. 311–331.
Google Scholar

Jermier J. M., Forbes L. C., Benn S., Orsato R. J. (2006), The New Corporate Environmentalism and Green Politics, [in:] S. Clegg, C. Hardy, T. Lawrence, W. R. Nord (eds.), The Sage Handbook of Organization Studies, Sage, London, pp. 618–650.
Google Scholar

Klein S. B. (2000), Family Businesses in Germany: Significance and Structure, “Family Business Review”, no. 13(3), pp. 157–182.
Google Scholar

Komorowski K. (2011), Cele i wartości współczesnego przedsiębiorstwa. Ujęcie behawioralne, Oficyna Wydawnicza SGH, Warszawa.
Google Scholar

Kowal D. (2013), Koncepcja zarządzania wartością przedsiębiorstwa w perspektywie współczesnych wyzwań rozwojowych podmiotów gospodarczych, „Zeszyty Naukowe Wyższej Szkoły Zarządzania i Bankowości w Krakowie”, no. 27, pp. 1–14.
Google Scholar

Kozłowska A. (2006), Alternatywne teorie zachowania przedsiębiorstw, [in:] D. Kopycińska (ed.), Zachowania decyzyjne podmiotów gospodarczych, Wydawnictwo Printgroup, Szczecin, pp. 25–41.
Google Scholar

Laitinen E. K., Gin C. (2006), How Do Small Companies Measure Their Performance?, “Problems and Perspectives in Management”, no. 4(3), pp. 49–68.
Google Scholar

Lederer B. (2008), Platforms for data quality progress: The client’s guide to rapid improvement of online research, RFL Communications, Skokie.
Google Scholar

Lewicka B., Misterek W. (2013), Features of an Innovative Company in the Opinion of the Business Entities and the Business Environment Institutions, [in:] Active Citizenship by Knowledge Management & Innovation: Proceedings of the Management, Knowledge and Learning International Conference 2013, To Know Press, Zadar, pp. 577–584, http://www.toknowpress.net/ISBN/978-961-6914-02-4/papers/ML13-294.pdf [accessed: 29.04.2017].
Google Scholar

Longo M., Mura M., Bonoli A. (2005), Corporate social responsibility and corporate performance: the case of Italian SMEs, “Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society”, no. 5(4), pp. 28–42.
Google Scholar

Mattingly J. E., Berman S. (2006), Measurement of corporate social action: discovering taxonomy in the Kinder Lydenburg Domini ratings data, “Business and Society”, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 20–46.
Google Scholar

Mishra S., Damodar S. (2010), Does corporate social responsibility influence firm performance of Indian companies?, “Journal of Business Ethics”, no. 95(4), pp. 571–601.
Google Scholar

Moneva J. M., Rivera‑Lirio J. M., Muñoz‑Torres M. J. (2007), The corporate stakeholder commitment and social and financial performance, “Industrial Management & Data Systems”, no. 107(1), pp. 84–102.
Google Scholar

Noga A. (2009), Teorie przedsiębiorstw, Polskie Wydawnictwo Ekonomiczne, Warszawa.
Google Scholar

Orlitzky M., Schmidt F. L., Rhynes S. L. (2003), Corporate Social and Financial Performance: A Meta‑Analysis, “Organization Studies”, no. 24(3), pp. 403–441.
Google Scholar

Peloza J. (2009), The Challenge of Measuring Financial Impacts From Investments in Corporate Social Performance, “Journal of Management”, vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 1518–1541.
Google Scholar

Radin T., Calkins M. (2006), The Struggle against Sweatshops: Moving toward Responsible Global Business, “Journal of Business Ethics”, no. 66, pp. 261–272.
Google Scholar

Robertson C., Watson A. (2004), Corruption and change: The impact of foreign direct investment, “Strategic Management Journal”, no. 25, pp. 385–396.
Google Scholar

Salzmann O., Ionescu‑Somers A., Steger U. (2005), The business case for corporate sustainability: literature review and research options, “European Management Journal”, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 27–36.
Google Scholar

Smith N. C., Lenssen G. (2009), Mainstreaming Corporate Responsibility: An Introduction, [in:] N. C. Smith, G. Lenssen (eds.), Mainstreaming Corporate Responsibility, Wiley, West Sussex, pp. 2–8.
Google Scholar

Staudt S., Shao C. Y., Dubinsky A. J., Wilson P. H. (2014), Corporate Social Responsibility, Perceived Customer Value, and Customer‑ Based Brand Equity?: A Cross‑National Comparison, “Journal of Strategic Innovation and Sustainability”, no. 10(1), pp. 65–87.
Google Scholar

Wallace J. C., Butts M. M., Johnson P. D., Stevens F. G., Smith M. B. (2016), A multilevel model of employee innovation: Understanding the effects of regulatory focus, thriving, and employee involvement climate, “Journal of Management”, no. 42(4), pp. 982–1004.
Google Scholar

Weber M. (2008), The Business Case for Corporate Social Responsibility: A Company‑Level Measurement Approach for CSR, “European Management Journal”, no. 26(4), pp. 247–261.
Google Scholar

Zajkowski R. (2015), Corporate Social Responsibility in medium and big sizes Polish family and non‑family businesses, [in:] G. Hofbauer et al. (eds.), Challenges, Research and Perspectives, Europäische Forschung‑ und Arbeitsgruppeuni‑edition, Berlin, pp. 115–129.
Google Scholar