Use of a Refined Corporate Social Responsibility Model to Mitigate Information Asymmetry and Evaluate Performance

While the importance of Corporate Sociable Responsibility (CSR) has been widely acknowledged, research on how to guide a company in evaluating and improving its CSR performance is relatively under-explored. This paper adopts the predominant framework from the United Nations (UN) and proposes a refined CSR model by using a hybrid multiple criteria decision-making (MCDM) approach. The proposed approach is expected to mitigate the potential information asymmetry issue that might deteriorate the CSR performance of a company. To illustrate the hybrid approach, this study analyzes the CSR performance of four publicly listed information technology (IT) manufacturing companies with the participation of senior domain experts, by using the proposed approach. The CSR performance ranking results are consistent by using various experiments, which is similar to the annual CSR contest held by a prominent organization from Taiwan in 2019. In addition, we illustrate how to apply this refined model to gain managerial insights and pursue sustainable CSR improvement with a priority.

[1]  Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng,et al.  New hybrid COPRAS-G MADM Model for improving and selecting suppliers in green supply chain management , 2016 .

[2]  Peng Zhou,et al.  An Interactive Decision-Making Method for Third-Party Logistics Provider Selection under Hybrid Multi-Criteria , 2020, Symmetry.

[3]  Chi-Yo Huang,et al.  Evaluating the Investment Projects of Spinal Medical Device Firms Using the Real Option and DANP-mV Based MCDM Methods , 2020, International journal of environmental research and public health.

[4]  Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng,et al.  A new hybrid MCDM model combining DANP with VIKOR to improve e-store business , 2013, Knowl. Based Syst..

[5]  G. Tzeng,et al.  Reconfiguring the innovation policy portfolios for Taiwan's SIP Mall industry , 2007 .

[6]  H. Jo,et al.  Does Corporate Social Responsibility Affect Information Asymmetry? , 2016, Journal of Business Ethics.

[7]  D. French,et al.  Sustainable Development Goals , 2021, Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

[8]  L. Martini,et al.  Influence of Human Capital, Social Capital, Economic Capital Towards Financial Performance & Corporate Social Responsibility , 2018 .

[9]  Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas,et al.  Updated discussions on ‘Hybrid multiple criteria decision-making methods: a review of applications for sustainability issues’ , 2018 .

[10]  Huchang Liao,et al.  Editorial Message: Special Issue on Fuzzy Systems in Intelligent Systems and Applications , 2020, International Journal of Fuzzy Systems.

[11]  Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas,et al.  Application of MCDM Methods in Sustainability Engineering: A Literature Review 2008-2018 , 2019, Symmetry.

[12]  Gang Kou,et al.  AHP/ANP theory and its application in technological and economic development: the 90th anniversary of Thomas L. Saaty , 2016 .

[13]  Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng,et al.  Extended VIKOR method in comparison with outranking methods , 2007, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[14]  Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng,et al.  Combining VIKOR-DANP model for glamor stock selection and stock performance improvement , 2014, Knowl. Based Syst..

[15]  K. Govindan,et al.  A fuzzy multi criteria approach for measuring sustainability performance of a supplier based on triple bottom line approach , 2013 .

[16]  Andreas Rasche,et al.  Discourse Ethics and Social Accountability: The Ethics of SA 8000 , 2007, Business Ethics Quarterly.

[17]  Vladislav B. Sotirović The Great Economic Depression in the Weimar Republic, 1929-1933 , 2014 .

[18]  M. Stafford-Smith UN sustainability goals need quantified targets , 2014, Nature.

[19]  Leyland Pitt,et al.  The Delphi technique in forecasting– A 42-year bibliographic analysis (1975–2017) , 2020 .

[20]  T. Douglas,et al.  Performance Implications of Incorporating Natural Environmental Issues into the Strategic Planning Process: An Empirical Assessment , 1998 .

[21]  G. Tzeng,et al.  Strengthen Financial Holding Companies’ Business Sustainability by Using a Hybrid Corporate Governance Evaluation Model , 2018, Sustainability.

[22]  Svatava Janoušková,et al.  Sustainable Development Goals: A need for relevant indicators , 2016 .

[23]  Andreas G. F. Hoepner,et al.  Sources of Stakeholder Salience in the Responsible Investment Movement: Why Do Investors Sign the Principles for Responsible Investment? , 2014 .

[24]  S. Zahra,et al.  Corporate social responsibility and organizational effectiveness: A multivariate approach , 1987 .

[25]  Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng,et al.  Combining DRSA decision-rules with FCA-based DANP evaluation for financial performance improvements , 2015 .

[26]  Karl V. Lins,et al.  Do Institutional Investors Drive Corporate Social Responsibility? International Evidence , 2017, Journal of Financial Economics.

[27]  Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas,et al.  State of art surveys of overviews on MCDM/MADM methods , 2014 .

[28]  Jean‐Pascal Gond,et al.  Enabling Institutional Investors’ Collective Action , 2013 .

[29]  Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas,et al.  A Hybrid MCDM Technique for Risk Management in Construction Projects , 2018, Symmetry.

[30]  Suzanne D. Pawlowski,et al.  The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations and applications , 2004, Inf. Manag..

[31]  M. C. Jensen,et al.  Harvard Business School; SSRN; National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER); European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI); Harvard University - Accounting & Control Unit , 1976 .

[32]  K. Eisenhardt Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review , 1989 .

[33]  Roberta Costa,et al.  A multidimensional approach for CSR assessment: The importance of the stakeholder perception , 2013, Expert Syst. Appl..

[34]  Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas,et al.  A New Hybrid MCDM Model: Sustainable Supplier Selection in a Construction Company , 2019, Symmetry.

[35]  D. Cormier,et al.  Corporate governance and information asymmetry between managers and investors , 2010 .

[36]  Keith Davis,et al.  Can Business Afford to Ignore Social Responsibilities? , 1960 .

[37]  T. Saaty Decision making — the Analytic Hierarchy and Network Processes (AHP/ANP) , 2004 .

[38]  John Elkington,et al.  Partnerships from cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st‐century business , 1998 .

[39]  Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng,et al.  Revised DEMATEL: Resolving the Infeasibility of DEMATEL , 2013 .

[40]  S. Hussain The ethics of ‘going green’: the corporate social responsibility debate , 1999 .

[41]  H. Simon,et al.  Bounded rationality in social science: Today and tomorrow , 2000 .

[42]  A. Carroll Corporate Social Responsibility , 1999, The Routledge Companion to Corporate Social Responsibility.

[43]  Kenneth E. Aupperle,et al.  An empirical examination of the relationship between corporate so#al responsibility and profitabilit , 1985 .

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

[45]  A. Shleifer,et al.  A Survey of Corporate Governance , 1996 .