Corporate Social and Financial Performance: An Extended Stakeholder Theory, and Empirical Test with Accounting Measures

Although agreement on the positive sign of the relationship between corporate social and financial performance is observed in the literature, the mechanisms that constitute this relationship are not yet well-known. We address this issue by extending management’s stakeholder theory by adding insights from psychology’s prospect decision theory and sociology’s resource dependence theory. Empirically, we analyze an extensive panel dataset, including information on disaggregated measures of social performance for the S&P 500 in the 1997–2002 period. In so doing, we enrich the extant literature by focusing on stakeholder heterogeneity, perceptional framing, and disaggregated measures of corporate social performance.

[1]  Edward J. Zajac,et al.  The symbolic management of stockholders: Corporate governance reforms and shareholder reactions , 1998 .

[2]  Allan R. Ryan,et al.  Organizational Learning from Performance Feedback: A Behavioral Perspective on Innovation and Change , 2004 .

[3]  M. Clarkson A Stakeholder Framework for Analyzing and Evaluating Corporate Social Performance , 1995 .

[4]  M. Pava,et al.  The association between corporate social-responsibility and financial performance: The paradox of social cost , 1996 .

[5]  D. Siegel,et al.  Corporate social responsibility and economic performance , 2006 .

[6]  B. Loasby The External Control of Organizations. A Resource Dependence Perspective , 1979 .

[7]  Tiziana Casciaro,et al.  Power Imbalance, Mutual Dependence, and Constraint Absorption: A Closer Look at Resource Dependence Theory , 2005 .

[8]  D. Hambrick,et al.  Upper Echelons: The Organization as a Reflection of Its Top Managers , 1984 .

[9]  Abagail McWilliams,et al.  Corporate Social Responsibility: a Theory of the Firm Perspective , 2001 .

[10]  D. Wood Corporate Social Performance Revisited , 1991 .

[11]  F. Schmidt,et al.  Corporate Social and Financial Performance: A Meta-Analysis , 2003 .

[12]  Alok Bhargava,et al.  Serial Correlation and the Fixed Effects Model , 1982 .

[13]  D. Wood,et al.  STAKEHOLDER MISMATCHING: A THEORETICAL PROBLEM IN EMPIRICAL RESEARCH ON CORPORATE SOCIAL PERFORMANCE , 1995 .

[14]  Frances J. Milliken,et al.  Cognition and corporate governance: Understanding boards of directors as strategic decision making groups , 1999 .

[15]  D. Wood,et al.  Social Issues in Management: Theory and Research in Corporate Social Performance , 1991 .

[16]  K. Davis The Case for and Against Business Assumption of Social Responsibilities , 1973 .

[17]  Marc Orlitzky Corporate Social Performance and Financial Performance , 2008 .

[18]  J. D. Margolis,et al.  Misery Loves Companies: Rethinking Social Initiatives by Business , 2003 .

[19]  Edward J. Zajac,et al.  Substance and Symbolism in CEOs' Long-Term Incentive Plans , 1994 .

[20]  Paul C. Godfrey The Relationship Between Corporate Philanthropy And Shareholder Wealth: A Risk Management Perspective , 2005 .

[21]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk — Source link , 2007 .

[22]  C. Fombrun,et al.  What's in a Name? Reputation Building and Corporate Strategy , 1990 .

[23]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect Theory : An Analysis of Decision under Risk Author ( s ) : , 2007 .

[24]  James D. Westphal,et al.  Accounting for the Explanations of CEO Compensation: Substance and Symbolism , 1995 .

[25]  Mark P. Sharfman The construct validity of the Kinder, Lydenberg & Domini social performance ratings data , 1996 .

[26]  I. Jawahar,et al.  Toward a Descriptive Stakeholder Theory: an Organizational Life Cycle Approach , 2001 .

[27]  Frank L. Schmidt,et al.  What do data really mean? Research findings, meta-analysis, and cumulative knowledge in psychology. , 1992 .

[28]  Gerald E. Fryxell,et al.  The Fortune Corporate 'Reputation' Index: Reputation for What? , 1994 .

[29]  A. Hillman,et al.  Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues: what's the bottom line? , 2001 .