nach oben

Journal of Business Ethics

Erschienen in:

23.10.2015

Does Ownership Structure Matter? The Effects of Insider and Institutional Ownership on Corporate Social Responsibility

verfasst von: Won-Yong Oh, Jongseok Cha, Young Kyun Chang

Erschienen in: Journal of Business Ethics | Ausgabe 1/2017

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

The extant literature has examined the effects of ownership structures on corporate social responsibility (CSR), yet it has overlooked the non-linear and interactive effects among major shareholder groups. In this study, we examine the non-linear effects of insider and institutional ownerships on CSR. We also examine whether it is necessary to have both incentive alignment and monitoring mechanisms (complementary view) or it is sufficient to have either mechanism (substitutive view) to promote CSR. Using a sample of the U.S. Fortune 1000 firms, our results suggest that insider and institutional ownerships have non-linear effects on CSR. We also find support for the complementary mechanisms view, in that the highest CSR rating is observed when both ownership levels are high. Therefore, firms need to maintain strong governance structures to realize synergistic effects in promoting CSR. Our findings provide a more in-depth understanding of the relationships between ownership structures and corporate social outcomes.

Vorheriger Artikel Is Institutional Ownership Related to Corporate Social Responsibility? The Nonlinear Relation and Its Implication for Stock Return Volatility

Nächster Artikel Aligning Civic and Corporate Leadership with Human Dignity: Activism at the Intersection of Business and Government

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Agrawal, A., & Mandelker, G. N. (1992). Shark repellents and the role of institutional investors in corporate governance. Managerial and Decision Economics, 13, 15–22.CrossRef

Aguilera, R., Desender, K., & Kabbach de Castro, L. (2012). A bundle perspective to comparative corporate governance. In T. Clarke & D. Branson (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of corporate governance (pp. 379–405). London: Sage Publications.CrossRef

Arora, P., & Dharwadkar, R. (2011). Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility (CSR): The moderating roles of attainment discrepancy and organization slack. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 19, 136–152.CrossRef

Barnea, A., & Rubin, A. (2010). Corporate social responsibility as a conflict between shareholders. Journal of Business Ethics, 97, 71–86.CrossRef

Baysinger, B. D., Kosnik, R. D., & Turk, T. A. (1991). Effects of board and ownership structure on corporate R&D strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 205–214.CrossRef

Beurden, P. V., & Gössling, T. (2008). The worth of values: A literature review on the relation between corporate social and financial performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 82, 407–424.CrossRef

Bhabra, G. S. (2007). Insider ownership and firm value in New Zealand. Journal of Multinational Financial Management, 17, 142–154.CrossRef

Brickley, J. A., Lease, R. C., & Smith, C. W, Jr. (1988). Ownership structure and voting on antitakeover amendments. Journal of Financial Economics, 20, 267–291.CrossRef

Burke, L., & Logsdon, J. M. (1996). How corporate social responsibility pays off. Long Range Planning, 29, 495–502.CrossRef

Chaganti, R., & Damanpour, F. (1991). Institutional ownership, capital structure, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 479–491.CrossRef

Chang, Y. K., Oh, W. Y., Jung, J. C., & Lee, J. Y. (2012). Firm size and corporate social performance: The mediating role of outside director representation. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 19, 486–500.CrossRef

Chang, Y. K., Oh, W. Y., & Messersmith, J. G. (2013). Translating corporate social performance into financial performance: Exploring the moderating role of high-performance work practices. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24, 3738–3756.CrossRef

Cochran, P. L., & Wood, R. A. (1984). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 27, 42–56.CrossRef

Coffey, B. S., & Fryxell, G. E. (1991). Institutional ownership of stock and dimensions of corporate social performance: An empirical examination. Journal of Business Ethics, 10, 437–444.CrossRef

Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Connelly, B. L., Hoskisson, R. E., Tihanyi, L., & Certo, S. T. (2010). Ownership as a form of corporate governance. Journal of Management Studies, 47, 1561–1589.CrossRef

Dalton, D. R., Daily, C. M., Certo, S. T., & Roengpitya, R. (2003). Meta-analyses of financial performance and equity: Fusion or confusion? Academy of Management Journal, 46, 13–26.CrossRef

David, P., Kochhar, R., & Levitas, E. (1998). The effect of institutional investors on the level and mix of CEO compensation. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 200–208.CrossRef

Edwards, J. R., & Parry, M. E. (1993). On the use of polynomial regression equations as an alternative to difference scores in organizational research. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1577–1613.CrossRef

Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 1, 57–74.

Eisenmann, T. R. (2002). The effects of CEO equity ownership and firm diversification on risk taking. Strategic Management Journal, 23, 513–534.CrossRef

Gedajlovic, E., & Shapiro, D. M. (2002). Ownership structure and firm profitability in Japan. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 565–575.CrossRef

Godfrey, P. C., Merrill, C. B., & Hansen, J. M. (2009). The relationship between corporate social responsibility and shareholder value: An empirical test of the risk management hypothesis. Strategic Management Journal, 30, 425–445.CrossRef

Graves, S. B., & Waddock, S. A. (1994). Institutional owners and corporate social performance. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 1034–1046.CrossRef

Hatfield, G., Worrell, D. L., Davidson, W. N, I. I. I., & Bland, E. (1999). Turbulence at the top: Antecedents of key executive dismissal. Quarterly Journal of Business and Economics, 38, 3–24.

Himmelberg, C. P., Hubbard, R. G., & Palia, D. (1999). Understanding the determinants of managerial ownership and the link between ownership and performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 53, 353–384.CrossRef

Hoskisson, R. E., Castleton, M. W., & Withers, M. C. (2009). Complementarity in monitoring and bonding: More intense monitoring leads to higher executive compensation. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23, 57–74.CrossRef

Hoskisson, R. E., Hitt, M. A., Johnson, R. A., & Grossman, W. (2002). Conflicting voices: The effects of institutional ownership heterogeneity and internal governance on corporate innovation strategies. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 697–716.CrossRef

Huber, P. J. (1967). The behavior of maximum likelihood estimates under nonstandard conditions. In Proceedings of the Fifth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability.

Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305–360.CrossRef

Johnson, R. A., & Greening, D. W. (1999). The effects of corporate governance and institutional ownership types on corporate social performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 564–576.CrossRef

Kochhar, R., & David, P. (1996). Institutional investors and firm innovation: A test of competing hypotheses. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 73–84.CrossRef

Kock, C. J., Santaló, J., & Diestre, L. (2012). Corporate governance and the environment: What type of governance creates greener companies? Journal of Management Studies, 49, 492–514.CrossRef

Kosnik, R. D. (1987). Greenmail: A study of board performance in corporate governance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 32, 163–185.CrossRef

Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 268–305.CrossRef

Mattingly, J. E., & Berman, S. L. (2006). Measurement of corporate social action. Business and Society, 45, 20–46.CrossRef

McClelland, P. L., Barker, V. L., & Oh, W. Y. (2012). CEO career horizon and tenure: Future performance implications under different contingencies. Journal of Business Research, 65, 1387–1393.CrossRef

McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26, 117–127.

Morck, R., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1988). Management ownership and market valuation: An empirical analysis. Journal of Financial Economics, 20, 293–315.CrossRef

Oh, W. Y., Chang, Y. K., & Cheng, Z. (2014). When CEO career horizon problems matter for corporate social responsibility: The moderating roles of industry-level discretion and blockholder ownership. Journal of Business Ethics,. doi:10.1007/s10551-014-2397-z.

Oh, W. Y., Chang, Y. K., & Martynov, A. (2011). The effect of ownership structure on corporate social responsibility: Empirical evidence from Korea. Journal of Business Ethics, 104, 283–297.CrossRef

Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F., & Ryne, S. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24, 403–441.CrossRef

Rediker, K. J., & Seth, A. (1995). Boards of directors and substitution effects of alternative governance mechanisms. Strategic Management Journal, 16, 85–99.CrossRef

Schepker, D. J., & Oh, W. Y. (2013). Complementary or substitutive effects? Corporate governance mechanisms and poison pill repeal. Journal of Management, 39, 1729–1759.CrossRef

Schnatterly, K., Shaw, K. W., & Jennings, W. W. (2008). Information advantages of large institutional owners. Strategic Management Journal, 29, 219–227.CrossRef

Sethi, S. P. (2005). Investing in socially responsible companies is a must for public pension funds—because there is no better alternative. Journal of Business Ethics, 56, 99–129.CrossRef

Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1989). Management entrenchment: The case of manager specific investments. Journal of Financial Economics, 25, 123–140.CrossRef

Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1997). A survey of corporate governance. Journal of Finance, 52, 737–783.CrossRef

Teoh, H. Y., & Shiu, G. Y. (1990). Attitudes towards corporate social responsibility and perceived importance of social responsibility information characteristics in a decision context. Journal of Business Ethics, 9, 71–77.CrossRef

Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance-financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 8, 303–319.CrossRef

Walsh, J. P., Weber, K., & Margolis, J. D. (2003). Social issues and management: Our lost cause found. Journal of Management, 29, 859–881.CrossRef

White, H. (1982). Maximum likelihood estimation of misspecified models. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 53, 1–25.

Zahra, S. A., & Pearce, J. A. (1989). Boards of directors and corporate financial performance: A review and integrative model. Journal of Management, 15, 291–334.CrossRef

Zajac, E. J., & Westphal, J. D. (1994). The costs and benefits of managerial incentives and monitoring in large US corporations: When is more not better? Strategic Management Journal, 15, 121–142.CrossRef

Titel: Does Ownership Structure Matter? The Effects of Insider and Institutional Ownership on Corporate Social Responsibility
verfasst von: Won-Yong Oh
Jongseok Cha
Young Kyun Chang
Publikationsdatum: 23.10.2015
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in: Journal of Business Ethics / Ausgabe 1/2017
Print ISSN: 0167-4544
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-0697
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2914-8

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2017

CSR Initiatives as Market Signals: A Review and Research Agenda

Exploring Corporations’ Dialogue About CSR in the Digital Era

Business for Good? An Investigation into the Strategies Firms Use to Maximize the Impact of Financial Corporate Philanthropy on Employee Attitudes

Ethics, Faith, and Profit: Exploring the Motives of the U.S. Fair Trade Social Entrepreneurs

CSR, Innovation, and Firm Performance in Sluggish Growth Contexts: A Firm-Level Empirical Analysis

No Company is an Island. Sector-Related Responsibilities as Elements of Corporate Social Responsibility

Premium Partner