The role of corporate social responsibility in strengthening multiple stakeholder relationships: A field experiment

This research relied on a field experiment involving a real-world instance of corporate philanthropy to shed light on both the scope and limitations of the strategic returns to corporate social responsibility (CSR). In particular, the authors demonstrate that the impact of CSR in the real world is not only less pervasive than has been previously acknowledged but also more multifaceted than has been previously conceptualized. The findings indicated that contingent on CSR awareness, which was rather low, stakeholders did react positively to the focal company not only in the consumption domain but in the employment and investment domains as well. Stakeholder attributions regarding the genuineness of the company’s motives moderated these effects.

[1]  Howard B. Lee,et al.  Foundations of Behavioral Research , 1973 .

[2]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[3]  J. K. Harcourt.  Honesty--the best policy. , 1988, Australian dental journal.

[4]  Gilbert A. Churchill,et al.  Caution in the Use of Difference Scores in Consumer Research , 1993 .

[5]  L. Preston,et al.  The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications , 1995 .

[6]  Steven Fein.  Effects of suspicion on attributional thinking and the correspondence bias , 1996 .

[7]  D. Turban,et al.  Corporate Social Performance And Organizational Attractiveness To Prospective Employees , 1997 .

[8]  Tom J. Brown,et al.  The Company and the Product: Corporate Associations and Consumer Product Responses: , 1997 .

[9]  Peter A. Dacin,et al.  The Company and the Product: Corporate Associations and Consumer Product Responses , 1997 .

[10]  Anthony D. Miyazaki,et al.  The influence of cause-related marketing on consumer choice: Does one good turn deserve another? , 2000 .

[11]  D. Turban,et al.  Corporate Social Performance As a Competitive Advantage in Attracting a Quality Workforce , 2000 .

[12]  C. Bhattacharya,et al.  Does Doing Good Always Lead to Doing Better? Consumer Reactions to Corporate Social Responsibility , 2001 .

[13]  M. Forehand,et al.  When Is Honesty The Best Policy? The Effect of Stated Company Intent on Consumer Skepticism , 2002 .

[14]  C. Bhattacharya,et al.  Consumer–Company Identification: A Framework for Understanding Consumers’ Relationships with Companies , 2003 .

[15]  N. Smith,et al.  Corporate Social Responsibility: Whether or How? , 2003 .

[16]  Dave Ulrich,et al.  Capitalizing on capabilities. , 2004, Harvard business review.

[17]  V. Kasturi Rangan,et al.  Valuing the Cause Marketing Relationship , 2004 .

[18]  O. Ferrell,et al.  Corporate social responsibility and marketing: An integrative framework , 2004 .

[19]  N. Dawar,et al.  Corporate social responsibility and consumers' attributions and brand evaluations in a product–harm crisis , 2004 .

[20]  C. Bhattacharya,et al.  Doing Better at Doing Good: When, Why, and How Consumers Respond to Corporate Social Initiatives , 2004 .

[21]  Donald R. Lichtenstein,et al.  The Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility on Customer Donations to Corporate-Supported Nonprofits , 2004 .

[22]  Peter A. Dacin,et al.  Identity, intended image, construed image, and gnreputation: An interdisciplinary framework and suggested terminology , 2006 .

[23]  Lois A. Mohr,et al.  Building corporate associations: Consumer attributions for corporate socially responsible programs , 2006 .