ABSTRACT
The aim of the current research was to examine the impact of the wider view of CSR on operations management of any the organization. The aim was divided into four objectives i.e.
This research was based on secondary analysis. The researcher collected secondary data from internet and peer-reviewed journals to achieve the research objectives. The researcher made the following conclusion from this research. Decision-making is the core responsibility of managers. Operations managers need ensure that business decisions do not affect the society negatively. The business should not make profits at the cost of the environment. The manager should make decisions that are in the best interest of the organization as well as society so that a win win situation can be achieved. CSR affects each and every business decision, and thus, the manager shall ensure that societal needs are not being compromised in the quest of profits.
INTRODUCTION
Background to research
According to Friedman and Miles, (2006), Decision-making is one of the core functions of managers. Managers need to decide anything and everything. They have to take care of firm short term, long term and strategic decisions. The internal and external the environment of the firm affects the Decision-making of managers. The main factors that affect the Decision-making of operational managers include political, social, legal, economical and technological factors. Garriga and Melé, (2004) added that before making any decision, the manager needs to evaluate the economic and the environmental affect. The managers need to evaluate whether the new product launch will affect profits or whether it will be useful for the environment or not. Similarly, managers also need to determine whether their organization is performing its duty to the environment or not. The managers need to create a balance between the organizational interest and the environmental interest so that a win win situation can be achieved. Thus, the Decision-making is a crucial aspect of management. They cannot make decision just like that. Extensive evaluation of each factor is required before reaching any final verdict. The current paper is about how corporate social responsibility affects the management decisions. For this purpose, the researcher will explain the influence corporate social responsibility on management decisions through examples.
Overview Of Topic
Usually, the operations management department is responsible for all routine business tasks. However, the operations management department is the backbone of the organization. Operations management department ensures that the organization is running smoothly without any major bottleneck. The organizations cannot succeed in the long term if the operations managers are a laid-back. The operation managers are exposed to all kinds of business risks and challenges. It is because operations management is responsible for all sorts of Decision-making related to business. Freeman (1994) added that every business decision has some the environmental and social implications. The operation managers need to be aware of these implications and respond to them in a proper manner. Thus, before making any important decision, it is very important to study the consequences of that decision.
According to Wood (2010), it is the duty of the operation manager to maintain the goodwill of the organization. If the manager makes decisions without studying the facts and figure, the business reputation can easily go down. Thus, managers need to be very careful in decision-making. They need to reflect on the current and future business trends so that they can enhance the value of the organization and contribute positively to the society. According to Van Marrewijk, (2003), a number of issues can affect business operations and society, and it is not possible for manager to focus on all the issues. The future is uncertain and unknown. What managers should do is to learn from past practice/trends and apply their knowledge in current business the environment so that business operations can improve. These days the term corporate social responsibility is gaining popularity in business managers. For this purpose, managers need to understand that they have a responsibility towards the society, and they need to make a decision in such a manner that society is not negatively affected through them. Moreover, the managers need to ensure to that business is not making profit at the cost of society. This research is useful because it will throw light on the effect of corporate social responsibility on operations management. The conceptual framework for this paper as follow
Aims and objective
The aim of the research is “How does the wider view of corporate social responsibility (CSR) influence operations management decisions?”. Since the aim is broad, it has been broken into several small objectives.
What is CSR?
Even though CSR is a very famous term having extensive literature, it has no universally accepted definition. Different authors have defined CSR in different contexts according to their study. This section discusses few of the commonly known definitions of CSR.
Kakabadse, Rozuel and Lee-Davies, (2005) affirmed that, CSR refers to the contribution made by business towards sustainable development of society. CSR helps businesses to create a balance between business and the environmental needs so that business decisions have a positive impact. However, CSR is not an obligation on the business but it is a voluntary action initiated by business managers in order to become responsible towards society.
According to Kang, (2009), CSR is an ongoing process adopted by business so that there is alignment between business and societal needs. Through CSR, business contributes to the society so that the quality of life of the common man can be improved to some extent.
In addition to that, Kelly, (2009) added that refer to the commitment of the company to work in the best interest of the society. For this business, the company tends to operate in an economical and sustainable manner so that societal and stakeholder interest can be protected.
According to Siegel and Vitaliano, (2007), CSR, CSR helps companies to integrate their social, the environmental and economical concerns in the best possible manner without any obligation.
Apart from the above-mentioned definitions, there are other definitions of CSR as well. Each of the CSR definition comprises of five important dimensions. The next sections throw light on different definitions of CSR and then relate these dimensions with operations management.
How does the wider view of corporate social responsibility influence operations management?
This section is very important for achieving the aims and objective of the current research. The researcher will discuss how the wider view of CSR affects operations management of the organization. The operations management is the backbone of the organization. The operations management is held responsible for all major business decisions, and CSR is no exception. Every business decision taken by manager is somehow affected by CSR. This section elaborates the effect of CSR on operations management. The researcher will discuss the link between each dimension of CSR with operations management.
Dimensions of CSR and their applications
There are five main dimensions of CSR as mentioned in the above discussion. These include the environmental dimensions, the social dimension, the economic dimension, stakeholder dimension and finally voluntariness dimension. Each dimension is equally important. Almost all definitions of CSR have these five elements incorporated into them.
The environmental dimension and Operations
The environmental sustainability is an important dimension of CSR. The environmental sustainability is a broad term. There are different definitions given by different the organizations regarding the environmental sustainability. In simple words, the environmental sustainability refers to creating a balance between the organizational and the environmental interest. In another words, the environmental sustainability means meeting personal present needs in such a manner that the need of future generations remain unaffected. It means that the business must either contribute positively to the environmental or not contribute at all, but it should not affect the environment in a negative manner. The business must not make a profit at the cost of the natural environment.
The environmental protection is one of the prime duties of operations managers, and they cannot avoid it at any cost. The operations manager has to ensure any business decision does not affect the organizational and general the environment in a negative manner. The product design or operational failure should not add to the environmental pollution. Most of the pollution causing disasters does not take happen just like that. There are a number of reasons behind these disasters, but the prime reason is inefficiency of operations manager. Shapiro, (1988) added that Oil spills, oil tankers run aground, chemical leaks into lakes or rivers are all due to inefficiency of operations managers. Such disasters may not have serious consequences in the short term, but they are definitely problematic in the long term. It is operations managers’ responsibility to act in good faith take adequate decisions so that these events can be avoided. It is only possible if the operations managers take day-to-day decision carefully.
The best example to quote is here of HP. HP offers technological solutions to consumers and businesses. HP has the best recycling program that focuses on reducing the environmental impact of its products so that environment is least affected. For this purpose, they use recovered material in their products. HP is committed to maintaining environmental sustainability, and this is evident from its recent partnership with different retailers all over the world in order to offer free recycling to them (Bronn and Vrioni, 2001).
Exxon Valdez failure to comply with CSR led to a loss of more than $4.84 billion recently. Exxon Valdez tanker incident took place in Prince William Sound near Alaska in which 260,000 to 750,000 barrels crude oil was spilled. Due to the oil spill, the company had to spend more than $4 billion in related cleanup, fines and damages. Moreover, the company scandal affected its reputation in a very negative manner. The wildlife and fishing industry was highly affected due to this incident. The main reason identified for this incident was inconsistency in operations. The operations department failed to provide backup staff in time leading to this tragic incident (Bragg et al., 1994).
Social dimension and Operations
Social dimension is another important component of CSR. This dimension refers that the organizations and society are interlinked. Any decision made by the organization can easily affect society. Therefore, it is very important that the business should understand its responsibilities towards the society. The business decisions have a direct or indirect impact on the society, and thus, business shall make efforts to contribute positively to the society.
The CSR also affects the business operations. The ultimate beneficiaries of any company are its customer’s i.e. both internal and external customers. The internal customers are those who work for the company, and the external customers comprise the society as a whole. Operations managers need to take decisions so that they can satisfy both customers. The decisions should be made in the best interest of internal and external customers. Orlitzky, Schmidt and Rynes, (2003) affirmed that operations managers need to ensure that the business decision positively affect the organization and society as a whole.
Another factor that needs to be taken care of by operation managers is ethical globalization. The manager shall treat everyone equally so that everyone rights are protected. For instance, while importing n important component from third world economy, it is manager’s duty to decide whether it is ethical or not. It is because the labor and raw material is cheap in third world countries. In addition to that, the export of jobs might be opposed by local trade unions. The ultimate authority to make decisions lies with operations managers, and they need to ensure that they make ethical decisions.
The case study of GAP is best applicable here. Recently, a story regarding GAP was published under Gap child labor shame. The story was about how an observed that gap is using the services of children for making clothes. As soon as the story was published, Gap investigated the matter and found out that one of the suppliers was indulged into child labor. As soon as the investigation completed, Gap dismissed the supplier and then launched specific code of conduct for its suppliers. The suppliers who met these criteria retained their position with Gap while the rest of them were dismissed (Meehan, Meehan, and Richards, 2006).
Recently, Nike lost much of its profits due to poor working conditions. There are about 700 factories under the umbrella of Nike. The working conditions of Nike are so poor that many people have accused Nike about harassing its employees. More than 30 percent of Nike employees in Indonesia worked in poor conditions whereas 58 percent suffered verbal abuse. More than 8 percent employees experienced sexual assault as well (Engle, 2004). The physical environment offered to its employees is very poor, and employees were found highly dissatisfied with it. However, the company responded to audit reports in a positive manner. They accepted their mistake and offered a detailed remediation plan.
Economic dimension and Operations
The economic dimension is another important element of CSR. Any CSR related activity has a direct impact on the cost of the business, and this is why there is so much debate on this aspect. Each social responsibility decision has a direct or indirect economic consequence. However, socially responsible decision has higher returns as the business earns goodwill through them. However, for gaining returns on CSR activities, the organizations need to be very patient. There is no fixed timescale for CSR returns. Smith, (2008) affirmed that CSR activities demand huge investments from business, and thus many managers show reluctance in investing. The investment in CSR activities directly benefits the individuals and society and, as a result, the society promotes the organizations practicing CSR. This is the reason CSR is gaining popularity in the organizations.
Every manager tries to create a balance between input and process cost that he can maintain higher profitability. However, this could lead to unfair practices. For instance, the managers can procure cheap and low quality raw material in order to save their cost and improve the profit margin. Such practices may have benefits in the short term, but they definitely call for a disaster in the long run. According to Mohr, Webb and Harris, (2001), the operations managers need to ensure that his decisions are not leaving a negative impact on the society as a whole. He should adopt ethical decision-making in order to create a win win situation.
Mintzberg, (1983) affirmed that the operations managers also need to take decisions related to processing. The operations managers shall take decisions that aim at reducing waste and maximizing output. The principle of six sigma should be followed so that zero waste can be achieved. Moreover, the technology used during processing should not have dire consequences for the society. The operations managers should adopt processes that do not contribute to the environmental pollution directly or indirectly. As resources are limited, managers should ensure that minimum resources are being utilized in processing in order to save these scarce resources for future. Finally, the operations managers should practice ethical Decision-making for its employees. It is the manager duty that work life balance is achieved by employees. Women should be given equal rights in the organization so that business contributes towards social equality.
The best example for this dimension is of Coca Cola. Recently, Coca Cola Company was accused of using ground water for its product. This resulted in the presence of pesticides in the products. As soon as the reports were published, Coca Cola called off its products from all regions. Furthermore, detailed investigation was carried out and only after that, the product was launched again. This resulted in loss of millions of dollars but Coca Cola management gave priority to consumer’s health instead of their profits (Vedwan, 2007).
During 2013, Apple Plc was accused of tax evasion and tax avoidance. The CEO of Apple testified to the Senate Committee in 2013 that they exploited different loopholes in taxation in order to spare themselves from taxes. As a result, they successfully managed to avoid billions of dollars of taxes (Cowan, 2009). Even though it was not an illegal act, but definitely not appreciated by its loyal customers. This incidence has badly affected Apply reputation and consumers do not trust it as a company.
Stakeholder Dimension and Operations
The stakeholders refer to individuals that are directly or indirectly involved with a company. There are two types of stakeholders i.e. internal and external stakeholders. The organizations need to be sensitive to need of both stakeholders in order to prosper. Few examples of stakeholders include shareholders, employees, suppliers, distributors, partners, top management and directors, financial regulators, government, trade unions, lobbying groups and society. According to this dimension of CSR, whenever a business related decision is taken or made, it should be ensured that stakeholders interest are not being violated. The business decisions shall be beneficial for all stakeholders to some extent so that there is win win situation.
As mentioned above, the stakeholders comprise of individual that are directly or indirectly affected by the business decisions. The end consumer is significantly affected by business decisions. If the safety of the consumer is compromised, then consumer welfare is at stake. Similarly, a poorly assembled product or poor quality equipment is used in the final product, the customer’s health and life will be at stake. It is the responsibility of the managers to ensure that no matter what happens customer’s health and well fare should be given priority. Using poor quality raw material might have positive outcomes in the short term but such practices definitely call for disaster in the long run.
In the case of bank, there should be no discrimination between profitable and usual customer. Each customer should be given equal respect no matter how much revenue he brings in. The accidents at factory sites are a common notion. It is the responsibility of the manager to ensure that the staff is protected during office hours. For this purpose, managers should equip the staff with safety gadget so that they remain safe and hazard free. Moreover, in the context of employee, the operations managers should ensure that staff is not exposed to undue work stress. The management should help the staff to achieve work life balance. Hence, ethical decision-making should be adopted in employee and customer context as well. There are certain challenges in this area as well. For instance, managers cannot inform the staff regarding future employment issues as this could lead to several conflicts.
Another important ethical dilemma faced by companies is in supplier context. Managers need to ensure that they do not restrict the suppliers to do business with competitors in order to practice CSR. Similarly, managers need to decide whether they should impose their ethical practices on suppliers or not and whether they will pay a high price to suppliers for the green products. All these decisions affect the business budget as well. Therefore, managers need to carefully examine different aspects before making any decision so that the decision does not have a negative impact on stakeholders.
The best example to quote is the mission and values of Ford Motors. The CEO of Ford Motors commented on the mission and vision and said that when the company was deciding the mission and values system, they were confused about the sequence of People, product and products (Godfrey and Hatch, 2007). However, after much discussion, there was a consensus that People should come first followed by products followed by profits. This shows that Ford Motors cares for its stakeholders.
Google is one of the most famous companies of the world. However, they were recently accused of tax evasion. Google revenue exceeded $18 billion during 2011, but it paid only $16 million to UK tax authority (Brooks, 2013). They did so by hiding their profits and revenue from the government. Detailed investigations are being conducted in this regard, but no verdict has been given yet.
Voluntary Dimension and Operations
The voluntary dimension is another important dimension of CSR. In developed countries, the regulations compel the organizations to practice CSR. There is a specific legislation for this purpose. Whenever an organization indulges into an activity that may affect the society negatively, the organizations pay huge warrants for it. However, the CSR activities should be adopted by the organization voluntarily. Law or legislation should not bind the businesses to practice CSR else, the essence of CSR becomes invalid. Simpson and Kohers, (2002) added that the companies should practice CSR voluntarily instead of forcefully. According to statistics, more than fifty percent of global corporations practice CSR voluntarily. They feel that they have a responsibility towards society, and thus, they practice CSR to meet that responsibility.
Last but not least, any step towards CSR should be voluntary. The law and legislation imposed practices do not come under CSR a company cannot claim that if it is practicing CSR if the law has compelled it to do so. Without the element of voluntariness, the essence of CSR fades. Managers should practice CSR in order to benefit its stakeholders and society as a whole and not out of legal obligation. Many companies practice CSR because they want to use it as a source of competitive advantage. However, any CSR related activity should be selfless instead of in expectation of return. It is a fact that the CSR activities benefit the companies in a unique manner. Although the returns on CSR activities are gained in the long term, they are definitely rewarding. Many companies use CSR activities in order to enhance their brand image and reputation.
CSR activities need to be initiated voluntarily so that its essence is maintained. In Spain, the government does not play an active role in the industrial sector. There is no requirement of mandatory CSR in companies. Even then, the companies pursue CSR without a second thought. Each and every company in Spain indulges in regular CSR activities voluntarily. Moreover, there 11 companies in Spain have the honor of being listed among the 100 sustainable performance leaders of the globe.
Misuse of CSR
Recently, many companies are misusing the CSR. CSR is often confused as charity. However, charity is a part of CSR and CSR itself has a wider scope. CSR refers to the voluntary contribution made by company for the benefit of society. It is not a onetime process rather it goes on and on. CSR can be implemented religiously only if the company values, mission, culture and strategy is aligned with the concept. The core values of the organization should reflect the CSR strategy at all times. Moreover, CSR should not be restricted to charitable activities only. The companies must realize that brand names should be recognized on how it is contributing towards environment or how it is treating its employees and workforce instead of just quality and price. Companies must constantly evaluate the difference they make to the world towards sustainable development.
The companies having CSR as a strategy constantly look for trends in society and look for ways to contribute towards society. However, many companies are misusing the concept of CSR. For instance, few of the companies indulge in CSR because they want to gain attention of the customers. They are least interest in the environmental benefits rather their motive is to capture customer attention. The bigger companies do CSR not because they are sensitive to the environment but because they want to achieve competitive advantage out of it. For this reasons, these companies have a proactive approach. They look for new opportunities in the environment and works for them.
Every CSR activity by company has hidden motives of the company. Companies indulge in CSR because they want to hide their black activities. They want to divert the attention of the consumers towards their good sides so that the company’s ills remain hidden. For instance, companies use CSR to green wash their image. They do so by exposing media with positive images so that the consumers forget about the unethical practices of the company. The case of Mc Donald’s is worth mentioning here. McDonald’s burgers are unhealthy and fattening. These burgers are affecting the health of the consumers. McDonalds and other fast food joints are responsible for growing obesity in the individuals. In order to protect their image, McDonalds is engaged in CSR activities. McDonalds has successfully gained consumers attention in CSR activities as it made several collaborations with different NGOs like Green Palace, Global Advisory Council For balanced active lifestyle and Nutritionist Steering Groups Europe in order to maintain its market position (McDonalds, 2013).
Conclusions and Recommendations
The above discussion reflected that CSR is very important for business and society. It works two way i.e. benefits both society and business at the same time. Every manager or the organization views CSR in a different way. Any activity related to CSR has a direct and indirect cost. The current research was about how wider view of CSR affects the operation management. The researcher found out that there are five elements of CSR. Each of the elements was discussed in detail. It followed how each element or dimension affects operation management. The paper concluded that the manager needs to very responsive to the environmental changes. They need to practice ethical decision-making so that the business decision does not violate the environmental sustainability. Mackey, Mackey and Barney, (2007) affirmed that, the operations managers need to ensure that their task is to align operational decision and society welfare so that a win win situation is created.
Any decision related to product or process may affect the society. The operation manager should choose raw materials and processes that are the environmentally friendly so that the business does not contribute to the environmental pollution. Similarly, operations managers should focus on green practices, so that the organization does not consume scarce resources. The zero wastage principle should be applied so that the scarce resources are protected. The business should not make a profit at the cost of the environment. In addition to that, the decisions taken by business should be in the best interest of the society and stakeholders.
According to Maak, (2008), every CSR related decision has a short and long-term cost and benefit associated with it. The managers should ensure that there is a balance between these cost and benefits so that both the organization and society can prosper in the long run. The CSR related decisions have important aspects as well. These decisions are complex and strategic so care needs to be taken while making these decisions. Operations managers constantly make efforts to understand the CSR issues so that they can incorporate them into their daily operations.
For this purpose, operation managers need to be aware of the environmental changes in order to respond to them in a proper, efficient manner. They need to constant evaluate their skills and master new ones. The operations managers can understand CSR through many theories, but most important concepts that are useful in this regard are risk management and trade off theory. If the managers understand these concepts well, they can understand and implement CSR in their operations easily. Lusch, (2007) affirmed that every decision has a trade off and so does CSR. The managers should understand that the investments in CSR will not go waste. The returns might be delayed, but certainly not wasted. When a business invests into CSR activities, they trade off finances, which could have been used in a more useful manner.
The managers must realize that CSR should be done with the sole purpose of serving the society. Companies should not use CSR as an activity to hide the negative impact of the company. There must be not any ulterior motives of CSR in any case. The CSR should be done for the overall benefit of the environment and society. If the companies want to improve their reputation and goodwill, they should not exploit CSR for this purpose; rather they should focus on their products for this purpose. Many companies like Nike and McDonalds should realize that by indulging into excessive CSR activities, they cannot improve their reputation and image. They should instead focus on their operation and improve them so that they can earn goodwill.
Kotler and Lee, (2005) affirmed that many companies practice CSR because they fear losing their reputation. Similarly, another most common reason for practicing CSR is that everyone in the industry is doing so, and thus company is compelled to do so. If the company does not practice CSR while its competitors are doing so, the business reputation is at stake. Companies practice the right thing in the right manner because they want to protect and enhance their reputation. According to Luo and Bhattacharya, (2009), very few companies practice CSR because they feel responsible towards society. It is sad indeed. CSR should be practiced voluntarily and selflessly in order to contribute to the society welfare and not for personal gains. However, this is not what is actually happening. The following recommendations may be useful for the organizations practicing CSR.
- The organizations should assess the potential causes and risk associated with any ethical practices
- Ethical practices should not be restricted to operations only but should be implemented at all level.
- The business should give priority to societal benefits so that business reputation can enhance.
- The management should have alternate strategies handy in case anything goes wrong.
- Ethical standards must not be compromised under any circumstances.
- Management should not play blame game if anything goes wrong rather they should take responsibility for it and try to learn from it so that future problems can be avoided.
- Management should remain honest with its suppliers, employees and customers no matter what in order to build a positive reputation among them.
The above guidelines can be beneficial for operation management in practicing CSR. The conclusion of the research can be summarized into one sentence i.e., the business should not make profits at the cost of the environment. CSR shall be practiced not to gain returns but to meet the moral obligation.
REFERENCES
Bragg, J. R., Prince, R. C., Harner, E. J., & Atlas, R. M. (1994). Effectiveness of bioremediation for the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Nature, 368(6470), 413-418.
Bronn, P. S., & Vrioni, A. B. (2001). Corporate social responsibility and cause-related marketing: an overview. International Journal of Advertising, 20(2), 207-222.
Brooks, R. (2013). The great tax robbery: how Britain became a tax haven for fat cats and big business. Oneworld Publications.
Cowan, D. T. (2009). New York's Unconstitutional Tax on the Internet: Amazon. com v. New York State Department of Taxation & Finance and the Dormant Commerce Clause. NCL Rev., 88, 1423.
Data retrieved from www. Mcdonalds.com on September 4, 2014
Engle, E. (2004). Corporate social responsibility (CSR): market-based remedies for international human rights violations. Willamette L. Rev., 40, 103.
Freeman R. E. (1994). “A stakeholder Theory of the Modern Corporation”, Ethical Theory and business, pp. 66-76.
Friedman A. L. & Miles S. (2006). Stakeholders-Theory and Practice, Oxford (US); Oxford University Press.
Garriga E. & Melé D. (2004). Corporate Social Responsibility Theories - Mapping the territory, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol 53 (Aug), pp.51-71.
Godfrey, P. C., & Hatch, N. W. (2007). Researching corporate social responsibility: an agenda for the 21st century. Journal of Business Ethics,70(1), 87-98.
Kakabadse, N. K., Rozuel, C., & Lee-Davies, L. (2005). Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder approach: a conceptual review. International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics, 1(4), pp. 277-302.
Kang, J. (2009). Corporate Social Responsibility? Not my business any more: The CEO Horizon Problem in Corporate Social Performance. Academy of Management Perspectives, 1-6.
Kelly, M. (2009). From Corporate Responsibility to Corporate Design: Rethinking the Purpose of the Corporation. Journal of Corporate Citizenship(33), 23-27.
Kinder, Lydenberg, & Domini. (2009). CSR Measurements. Retrieved September 12, 2009, from http://www.kld.com/
Kolk, A., & Pinske, J. (2006). Stakeholder mismanagement and corporate social responsibility crises. European Management Journal, 24(1), 59(14).
Kotler, P., & Lee, N. (2005). Corporate social responsibility: Doing the most good for your company and your cause. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Kotler, P., & Lee, N. (Eds.). (2005). Corporate Social Responsibility: John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ.
Luo, X., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2009). The Debate over Doing Good: Corporate Social Performance, Strategic Marketing Levers, and Firm-Idiosyncratic Risk. Journal of Marketing, 73, 198-213.
Lusch, R. F. (2007). Marketing's evolving identity: Defining our future. [Article]. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 26(2), 261-268.
Maak, T. (2008). Undivided Corporate Responsibility: Towards a Theory of Corporate Integrity. Journal of Business Ethics, 82.
Mackey, A., Mackey, T. B., & Barney, J. B. (2007). Corporate Social Responsibility and firm performance: investor preferences and corporate strategies. Academy of Management Review, 32, 817-835.
Maignan, I., & Ralson, D., A. . (2002). Corporate Social Responsibility in Europe and the U.S.: Insights from Businesses' Self-Presentations. Journal of International Business Studies, 33, pp. 497-514.
McGoldrick, P. J., & Freestone, O. M. (2008). Ethical product premiums: antecedents and extent of consumers’ willingness to pay. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 18(2), 185-201.
McWilliams, A., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, P. M. (2006). Corporate Social Responsibility:strategic implications. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 1-18.
Meehan, J., Meehan, K., & Richards, A. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: the 3C-SR model. International Journal of Social Economics, 33(5/6), 386-398.
Mintzberg, H. (1983). The case for corporate social responsibility. [Article]. Journal of Business Strategy, 4, 3.
Mohr, L. A., Webb, D. J., & Harris, K. E. (2001). Do consumers expect companies to be socially responsible? The impact of corporate social responsibility on buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 35(1), 45-72.
Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. The organization Studies, 24(3), 403-441.
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), 158-159.
Shapiro, B. P. (1988). What the Hell is Market Oriented? [Article]. Harvard Business Review, 66(6), 119-125.
Siegel, D. S., & Vitaliano, D. F. (2007). An Empirical Analysis of the Strategic Use of Corporate Social Responsibility. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 16(3), 773(720).
Simpson, & Kohers, T. (2002). The Link Between Corporate Social and Financial Performance: Evidence from the Banking Industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 35(2), 97-109.
Smith, N. G. (2008). Consumers as drivers of corporate social responsibility. In A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon & D. S. Siegel (Eds.). The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility (pp. 281-302). United States: Oxford University Press.
Van Marrewijk, M. (2003). Concepts and definitions of CSR and corporate sustainability: between agency and communion. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(2), 95-105.
Vedwan, N. (2007). Pesticides in Coca‐Cola and Pepsi: Consumerism, brand image, and public interest in a globalizing India. Cultural Anthropology, 22(4), 659-684.
Walls, J. L., Berrone, P., & Phan, P. H. (2012). Corporate governance and the environmental performance: is there really a link? Strategic Management Journal, n/a-n/a.
Wood, D. J. (2010). Measuring Corporate Social Performance: A Review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 50-84.
