Corporate Social Responsibility for Irresponsibility

http://environment.yale.edu/kotchen/pubs/csrcsi.pdf (2012):

The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy: Vol. 12: Iss. 1 (Contributions), Article 55. DOI: 10.1515/1935-1682.3308

Corporate Social Responsibility for Irresponsibility

Matthew Kotchen and Jon J. Moon

Abstract:
This paper provides an empirical investigation of the hypothesis that companies engage in corporate social responsibility (CSR) in order to offset corporate social irresponsibility (CSI). We find general support for the relationship that when companies do more “harm,” they also do more “good.” The empirical analysis is based on an extensive 15-year panel dataset that covers nearly 3,000 publicly traded companies. In addition to the overall finding that more CSI results in more CSR, we find evidence of heterogeneity among industries, where the effect is stronger in industries where CSI tends to be the subject of greater public scrutiny. We also investigate the degree of substitutability between different categories of CSR and CSI. Within the categories of community relations, environment, and human rights—arguably among those dimensions of social responsibility that are most salient—there is a strong within-category relationship. In contrast, the within-category relationship for corporate governance is weak, but CSI related to corporate governance appears to increase CSR in most other categories. Thus, when CSI concerns arise about corporate governance, companies seemingly choose to offset with CSR in other dimensions, rather than reform governance itself.

CSR and Employees

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.473.9433&rep=rep1&type=pdf

International Conference on Information and Finance
IPEDR vol.21 (2011) © (2011) IACSIT Press, Singapore

The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility
on Employees

Alin Stancu, Georgiana Florentina Grigore and Mihai Ioan Rosca
Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies – Romania

Abstract:
In the last years we witness a significant increase of society’s overall focus upon issues concerning sustainable development. This trend affected both companies and consumers. The sustainable development concept is present both in the scientific literature, but also in companies board rooms. Companies start to engage in CSR activities in order to respond to an external demand, while taking into consideration the positive effects of CSR. The article presents the results of a quantitative research regarding the employees’ attitude regarding social responsibility activities of their employers. In the beginning a short literature review is presented.

Keywords:
sustainability, corporate social responsibility, employees.


 

http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/business/ICCSR/assets/ibyucpdrvypr.pdf

No. 54-2010 ICCSR Research Paper Series – ISSN 1479-5124

Corporate Social Responsibility
Influence on Employees

Jean-Pascal Gond, Assâad El-Akremi, Jacques Igalens, Valérie Swaen

Abstract:
This paper analyzes Corporate Social Responsibility‘s (CSR) influence on employees. We integrate social identity theory and social exchange theory in a new framework. This framework explains how employees‘ perceptions of CSR trigger attitudes and behavior in the workplace which affect organizational, social and environmental performance. This model bridges micro and macro researches on socially responsible behavior, articulates social identification and social exchange processes, and explains how CSR contributes to corporate performance by influencing employees‘ behavior.

Key-words:
Corporate Social Responsibility – Social Exchange – Social Identity – Organizational Performance


 

http://hrcak.srce.hr/file/236052

Žana Prutina, PhD
Lecturer
University Sarajevo
School of Science and Technology
E-mail: zana.prutina@ssst.edu.ba

Dževad Šehić, PhD
Professor
University of Sarajevo
Faculty of Economic and Business
E-mail: dzevad.sehic@efsa.unsa.ba

EMPLOYEES’ PERCEPTIONS OF CORPORATE
SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY:
A CASE STUDY OF AWARD RECIPIENT

UDK / UDC: 005.35(497.6)
JEL klasifikacija / JEL classification: M14
Pregledni rad / Review
Primljeno / Received: 12. veljače 2016. / February 12, 2016
Prihvaćeno za tisak / Accepted for publishing: 24. svibnja 2016. / May 24, 2016

Abstract:
Employees’ perceptions of organizational corporate social responsibility (CSR) are usually a mixture of personal experiences of internal CSR and actions that affect external stakeholders. Recent research points to numerous benefits from employees’ positive view of company’s CSR efforts, however, analyses of employees’ perceptions and attitudes are still rare. The aim of this paper is to explore employees’ perceptions of company’s behaviour towards relevant stakeholders, and the extent to which such behaviours are seen as commendable, taking into consideration the company’s reputation. Analysing CSR orientation through employees’ perceptions can help distinguish between company’s genuine CSR orientation and simple window dressing. Using a mixed method approach that combines questionnaire, interview and content analysis, this exploratory study focuses on the perceptions of employees in a company recognized for socially responsible behaviour in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The results suggest that employees perceive their company as socially responsible, but also that there are variations in perceptions depending on the stakeholder group and point out the importance of the national business system and culture in CSR evaluation. The empirical findings correspond to its public reputation and provide legitimacy for the awards received.

Key words:
corporate social responsibility, employees’ perceptions, reputation,
Bosnia and Herzegovina

License to Ill

https://ucrtoday.ucr.edu/19079

License to Ill

Firms that engaged in prior socially responsible behavior are more likely to then engage in socially irresponsible behavior, research finds

By Sean Nealon on November 20, 2013

[…]

[Margaret Ormiston, Elaine Wong] found that prior corporate social responsibility was related to subsequent corporate social irresponsibility. More specifically for roughly every five positive actions that a firm takes, this gives them license to commit one negative action.

“These findings show that CEOs should be aware of this tendency so that they can prevent their companies from slipping into this pattern,” Wong said. “Additionally, corporate boards can’t allow CEOs to rest on their laurels. They need to be vigilant in monitoring CEOs.”

See also: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/peps.12029/abstract

CSR Evaluation and Corporate Hypocrisy

http://surface.syr.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1025&context=etd

Syracuse University
12-2013

The Role of Ethical Evaluation of Corporate Social
Responsibility in the Perception of Corporate
Hypocrisy, the Intention of Opinioned
Communication and Behavior toward a Firm

KyuJin Shim

ABSTRACT
Corporate hypocrisy refers to publics’ negative perception of CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) as a result of ethical attribution of CSR to normative ethics, and thus can be a useful indicator of the disappointing and ineffective role of CSR programs geared toward raising publics’ goodwill toward a firm. However, scant scholarly effort has been made to explore the concept of corporate hypocrisy in relation to corporate issues and crises, publics’ ethical orientation, cultural and national influence, and polarized sentiments toward global business in the media landscape. These aspects collectively constitute the unpredictable, uncontrollable public opinion, in particular the opinion of the socially minded general public, and these aspects thus generate a turbulent business arena across the globe.
        To fill this void, this dissertation concurrently conducted two sets of research: one used a survey methodology on a real company’s CSR case and the other used an experimental method. […]

Imbalanced Inclusion

RobecoSAM (Dow Jones Sustainability Yearbook) explained by CINCS (Creating Intelligent Natural Capital Solutions) in: Sustainability Indices and Environmental Reporting, 2013-04-23
(http://cincs.com/dev/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/InFocus23.pdf):

“[…] Environmental-business analysts and investors have challenged the credibility of DJSI’s information source for some time. DJSI [Dow Jones Sustainability Index] has four steps to follow in the evaluation process:

[1] First, each participating company has to fill in an industry-specific company questionnaire distributed by RobecoSAM, which evaluates the overall social and environmental strategies of each company.
[2] After that, DJSI will analyze industry-relevant media reports, press releases, news articles, investor commentaries and employee feedback to get a comprehensive understanding of how the company is perceived by opinion leaders and stakeholders.
[3] Following this is the company documentation section, in which RobecoSAM will request sustainability reports, environmental reports, health and safety reports, social reports and annual financial reports from each company.
[4] The last part is the company contact, in which SAM will have discussions and phone conversations with corporation leaders.

Of these, three of them are based on companies’ self-provided reports, data, resources and articles. In that circumstance, data could be optimized or even manipulated to generate better evaluation scores. For example, in the company documentation section, there is no standard sustainability reporting regulation regarding how companies should file sustainability and environmental reports. Therefore, companies are able to polish and further dress these data to make them appear glorious and “trustworthy.”
[…]
Conclusions – With the growing awareness of and demand for sustainability assessment, DJSI is a great tool for companies who are dedicated to gaining ongoing financial growth while meeting high environmental and social standards. The major benefit of being listed in DJSI is that it will help companies to be more transparent for investors through a thoroughly planned and designed corporate sustainability ranking system. The two major deficiencies of DJSI and other similar indices are that they lack authenticity in their auditing process and use imbalanced inclusion. […]”

Imbalanced inclusion: Inclusion of pros only while neglecting cons. In advertising that is legitimate. However, a performance evaluation or an audit which allows imbalanced inclusion is not credible.