Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
ATZ-Fachkongress

Chassis.tech plus 2024


4 Kongresse in einer Veranstaltung

Treffen Sie in München die Fachleute von Chassis, Lenkung, Bremsen sowie Reifen/Räder.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Journal of Business Ethics
Erschienen in: Journal of Business Ethics 4/2019

26.03.2018 | Original Paper

Reexamining Corporate Social Responsibility and Shareholder Value: The Inverted-U-Shaped Relationship and the Moderation of Marketing Capability

verfasst von: Wenbin Sun, Shanji Yao, Rahul Govind

Erschienen in: Journal of Business Ethics | Ausgabe 4/2019

Einloggen

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

search-config
loading …

Abstract

In the literature, CSR’s roles on firm performance are found to be positive, negative, or neutral. This inconclusive pattern suggests there may be a more complicated mechanism at work than the traditional focus on simple linear associations. We propose and test an inverted-U-shaped relationship between CSR and shareholder value, the fundamental measure of firm performance. Further, we incorporate a critical firm attribute, marketing capability, to moderate the nonlinear link between CSR and shareholder value, thereby exploring a previous understudied area involving the interplay between CSR and market-side competency. The results show that an initial increase in CSR engagement positively drives firm shareholder value, but the effect turns negative when a firm pursues excessive CSR engagement. Notably, however, this negative association does not apply to firms that have a high marketing capability. Our research generates meaningful implications for a stakeholder view of CSR, strategic management, firm valuation, resource-based theories, and business practices.
Vorheriger Artikel Activism and Abdication on the Inside: The Effect of Everyday Practice on Corporate Responsibility
Nächster Artikel Two Birds with One Stone: The Quest for Addressing Both Business Goals and Social Needs with Innovation

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
Literatur
Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. (2012). What we know and don’t know about corporate social responsibility a review and research agenda. Journal of Management,38(4), 932–968.
Anderson, R. C., & Reeb, D. M. (2003). Founding-family ownership and firm performance: evidence from the S&P 500. The Journal of Finance,58(3), 1301–1328.
Attig, N., El Ghoul, S., Guedhami, O., & Suh, J. (2013). Corporate social responsibility and credit ratings. Journal of Business Ethics,117(4), 679–694.
Barcos, L., Barroso, A., Surroca, J., & Tribó, J. A. (2013). Corporate social responsibility and inventory policy. International Journal of Production Economics,143(2), 580–588.
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management,17(1), 99–120.
Becchetti, L., Ciciretti, R., Hasan, I., & Kobeissi, N. (2012). Corporate social responsibility and shareholder’s value. Journal of Business Research,65(11), 1628–1635.
Berchicci, L. (2013). Towards an open R&D system: Internal R&D investment, external knowledge acquisition and innovative performance. Research Policy,42(1), 117–127.
Berman, S. L., Wicks, A. C., Kotha, S., & Jones, T. M. (1999). Does stakeholder orientation matter? The relationship between stakeholder management models and firm financial performance. Academy of Management Journal,42(5), 488–506.
Bharadwaj, A. S., Bharadwaj, S. G., & Konsynski, B. R. (1999). Information technology effects on firm performance as measured by Tobin’s q. Management Science,45(7), 1008–1024.
Bhattacharya, C. B., Korschun, D., & Sen, S. (2009). Strengthening stakeholder–company relationships through mutually beneficial corporate social responsibility initiatives. Journal of Business Ethics,85(2), 257–272.
Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2004). Doing better at doing good: When, why, and how consumers respond to corporate social initiatives. California Management Review,47(1), 9–24.
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,29(12), 1325–1343.
Branco, M. C., & Rodrigues, L. L. (2006). Corporate social responsibility and resource-based perspectives. Journal of Business Ethics,69(2), 111–132.
Chung, K. H., & Pruitt, S. W. (1994). A simple approximation of Tobin’s q. Financial Management,23(3), 70–74.
Cooper, M. J., Gulen, H., & Schill, M. J. (2008). Asset growth and the cross-section of stock returns. The Journal of Finance,63(4), 1609–1651.
Demsetz, H., & Villalonga, B. (2001). Ownership structure and corporate performance. Journal of Corporate Finance,7(3), 209–233.
Dutta, S., Narasimhan, O., & Rajiv, S. (1999). Success in high-technology markets: Is marketing capability critical? Marketing Science,18(4), 547–568.
Eichholtz, P., Kok, N., & Quigley, J. M. (2010). Doing well by doing good? Green office buildings. American Economic Review, 100(5), 2492–2509.
Fang, E., Palmatier, R. W., & Steenkamp, J. B. E. (2008). Effect of service transition strategies on firm value. Journal of Marketing,72(5), 1–14.
Frooman, J. (1999). Stakeholder influence strategies. Academy of Management Review,24(2), 191–205.
Godfrey, P. C. (2005). The relationship between corporate philanthropy and shareholder wealth: A risk management perspective. Academy of Management Review,30(4), 777–798.
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(4), 425–445.
Grewal, R., & Tansuhaj, P. (2001). Building organizational capabilities for managing economic crisis: The role of market orientation and strategic flexibility. Journal of Marketing,65(2), 67–80.
Gruca, T. S., & Rego, L. L. (2005). Customer satisfaction, cash flow, and shareholder value. Journal of Marketing,69(3), 1–130.
Haans, R. F., Pieters, C., & He, Z. L. (2016). Thinking about U: Theorizing and testing U-and inverted U-shaped relationships in strategy research. Strategic Management Journal,37(7), 1177–1195.
Harjoto, M., Laksmana, I., & Lee, R. (2015). Board diversity and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics,132(4), 641–660.
Harrison, J. S., & Freeman, R. E. (1999). Stakeholders, social responsibility, and performance: Empirical evidence and theoretical perspectives. Academy of Management Journal,42(5), 479–485.
Hillman, A. J., & Keim, G. D. (2001). Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues: what’s the bottom line? Strategic Management Journal,22(2), 125–139.
Hough, J. R. (2006). Business segment performance redux: a multilevel approach. Strategic Management Journal,27(1), 45–61.
Hsiao, C. (2005). Why panel data? The Singapore Economic Review,50(02), 143–154.
Huselid, M. A., Jackson, S. E., & Schuler, R. S. (1997). Technical and strategic human resources management effectiveness as determinants of firm performance. Academy of Management Journal,40(1), 171–188.
Jamali, D. (2008). A stakeholder approach to corporate social responsibility: A fresh perspective into theory and practice. Journal of Business Ethics,82(1), 213–231.
Jo, H., & Harjoto, M. A. (2012). The causal effect of corporate governance on corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics,106(1), 53–72.
Jo, H., & Na, H. (2012). Does CSR reduce firm risk? Evidence from controversial industry sectors. Journal of Business Ethics,110(4), 441–456.
Karnani, A. (2007). Doing well by doing good—Case study: ‘Fair & Lovely’ whitening cream. Strategic Management Journal,28(13), 1351–1357.
Keats, B. W., & Hitt, M. A. (1988). A causal model of linkages among environmental dimensions, macro organizational characteristics, and performance. Academy of Management Journal,31(3), 570–598.
Kotabe, M., Srinivasan, S. S., & Aulakh, P. S. (2002). Multinationality and firm performance: The moderating role of R&D and marketing capabilities. Journal of International Business Studies,33(1), 79–97.
Krasnikov, A., & Jayachandran, S. (2008). The relative impact of marketing, research-and-development, and operations capabilities on firm performance. Journal of Marketing,72(4), 1–11.
Lee, R. P., & Grewal, R. (2004). Strategic responses to new technologies and their impact on firm performance. Journal of Marketing,68(4), 157–171.
Luo, X., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2006). Corporate social responsibility, customer satisfaction, and market value. Journal of Marketing,70(4), 1–18.
Madden, T. J., Fehle, F., & Fournier, S. (2006). Brands matter: An empirical demonstration of the creation of shareholder value through branding. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,34(2), 224–235.
Makadok, R. (2001). Toward a synthesis of the resource-based and dynamic-capability views of rent creation. Strategic Management Journal,22(5), 387–401.
Marom, I. Y. (2006). Toward a unified theory of the CSP–CFP link. Journal of Business Ethics,67(2), 191–200.
Maury, B., & Pajuste, A. (2005). Multiple large shareholders and firm value. Journal of Banking & Finance,29(7), 1813–1834.
McGuire, J. B., Sundgren, A., & Schneeweis, T. (1988). Corporate social responsibility and firm financial performance. Academy of Management Journal,31(4), 854–872.
McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review,26(1), 117–127.
Minor, D., & Morgan, J. (2011). CSR as reputation insurance: Primum non nocere. California Management Review,53(3), 40–59.
Minton, B. A., & Schrand, C. (1999). The impact of cash flow volatility on discretionary investment and the costs of debt and equity financing. Journal of Financial Economics,54(3), 423–460.
Mishra, S., & Modi, S. B. (2013). Positive and negative corporate social responsibility, financial leverage, and idiosyncratic risk. Journal of Business Ethics,117(2), 431–448.
Morgan, N. A., & Rego, L. L. (2009). Brand portfolio strategy and firm performance. Journal of Marketing,73(1), 59–74.
Morgan, N. A., Vorhies, D. W., & Mason, C. H. (2009). Market orientation, marketing capabilities, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal,30(8), 909–920.
Nath, P., Nachiappan, S., & Ramanathan, R. (2010). The impact of marketing capability, operations capability and diversification strategy on performance: A resource-based view. Industrial Marketing Management,39(2), 317–329.
Newbert, S. L. (2007). Empirical research on the resource-based view of the firm: an assessment and suggestions for future research. Strategic Management Journal,28(2), 121–146.
Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies,24(3), 403–441.
Oxelheim, L., & Randøy, T. (2003). The impact of foreign board membership on firm value. Journal of Banking & Finance,27(12), 2369–2392.
Ruf, B. M., Muralidhar, K., Brown, R. M., Janney, J. J., & Paul, K. (2001). An empirical investigation of the relationship between change in corporate social performance and financial performance: A stakeholder theory perspective. Journal of Business Ethics,32(2), 143–156.
Russo, A., & Perrini, F. (2010). Investigating stakeholder theory and social capital: CSR in large firms and SMEs. Journal of Business Ethics,91(2), 207–221.
Salzmann, O., Ionescu-Somers, A., & Steger, U. (2005). The business case for corporate sustainability: Literature review and research options. European Management Journal,23(1), 27–36.
Sen, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Korschun, D. (2006). The role of corporate social responsibility in strengthening multiple stakeholder relationships: A field experiment. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,34(2), 158–166.
Sénéchal, S., Georges, L., & Pernin, J. L. (2014). Alliances between corporate and fair trade brands: Examining the antecedents of overall evaluation of the co-branded product. Journal of Business Ethics,124(3), 365–381.
Shinkle, G. A., & Kriauciunas, A. P. (2010). Institutions, size and age in transition economies: Implications for export growth. Journal of International Business Studies,41(2), 267–286.
Sirmon, D. G., Hitt, M. A., & Ireland, R. D. (2007). Managing firm resources in dynamic environments to create value: Looking inside the black box. Academy of Management Review,32(1), 273–292.
Srivastava, R. K., Shervani, T. A., & Fahey, L. (1998). Market-based assets and shareholder value: A framework for analysis. The Journal of Marketing,62(1), 2–18.
Steenkamp, J. B. E., & Baumgartner, H. (1992). The role of optimum stimulation level in exploratory consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Research,19(3), 434–448.
Sun, W., & Price, J. M. (2016). The impact of environmental uncertainty on increasing customer satisfaction through corporate social responsibility. European Journal of Marketing,50(7/8), 1209–1238.
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal,18(7), 509–533.
Teoh, S. H., Welch, I., & Wazzan, C. P. (1999). The effect of socially activist investment policies on the financial markets: Evidence from the South African boycott. The Journal of Business,72(1), 35–89.
Thompson, S. B. (2011). Simple formulas for standard errors that cluster by both firm and time. Journal of Financial Economics,99(1), 1–10.
Udayasankar, K. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and firm size. Journal of Business Ethics,83(2), 167–175.
Van Beurden, P., & Gössling, T. (2008). The worth of values–a literature review on the relation between corporate social and financial performance. Journal of Business Ethics,82(2), 407–424.
Vlachos, P. A., Theotokis, A., & Panagopoulos, N. G. (2010). Sales force reactions to corporate social responsibility: Attributions, outcomes, and the mediating role of organizational trust. Industrial Marketing Management,39(7), 1207–1218.
Vorhies, D. W., & Morgan, N. A. (2005). Benchmarking marketing capabilities for sustainable competitive advantage. Journal of Marketing,69(1), 80–94.
Vorhies, D. W., Morgan, R. E., & Autry, C. W. (2009). Product-market strategy and the marketing capabilities of the firm: Impact on market effectiveness and cash flow performance. Strategic Management Journal,30(12), 1310–1334.
Wooldridge, J. M. (2010). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. Cambridge: MIT press.
Wright, P., & Ferris, S. P. (1997). Agency conflict and corporate strategy: The effect of divestment on corporate value. Strategic Management Journal,18(1), 77–83.
Zott, C. (2003). Dynamic capabilities and the emergence of intra-industry differential firm performance: insights from a simulation study. Strategic Management Journal,24(2), 97–125.
Metadaten
Titel
Reexamining Corporate Social Responsibility and Shareholder Value: The Inverted-U-Shaped Relationship and the Moderation of Marketing Capability
verfasst von
Wenbin Sun
Shanji Yao
Rahul Govind
Publikationsdatum
26.03.2018
Verlag
Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in
Journal of Business Ethics / Ausgabe 4/2019
Print ISSN: 0167-4544
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-0697
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3854-x

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2019

Journal of Business Ethics 4/2019 Zur Ausgabe

Original Paper

Activism and Abdication on the Inside: The Effect of Everyday Practice on Corporate Responsibility

Original Paper

Exploring the Link Between Human Rights, the Capability Approach and Corporate Responsibility

Original Paper

Freedom, Autonomy, and Harm in Global Supply Chains

Original Paper

Employees as Conduits for Effective Stakeholder Engagement: An Example from B Corporations

Original Paper

CSR as Gendered Neocoloniality in the Global South

Original Paper

Justice and Corporate Governance: New Insights from Rawlsian Social Contract and Sen’s Capabilities Approach

Premium Partner

    Bildnachweise