Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 93, Issue 2, pp 321–333 | Cite as

Indigenous Characteristics of Chinese Corporate Social Responsibility Conceptual Paradigm



The purpose of this study is to identify China’s indigenous conceptual dimensions of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and to increase the knowledge and comprehension about CSR in specific context. We conducted an inductive analysis of CSR in China based on an open-ended survey of 630 CEOs and business owners in 12 provinces (municipalities) in China. In the survey, we collected CSR sample responses. After examining the qualitative data, we identified nine dimensions of CSR, among which six dimensions are similar to their western counterparts; however, the other three dimensions were never mentioned in previous literature, which mostly study the cases in the western world. In addition, two of the widely accepted CSR dimensions in the western world have no embodiments in China. A comparative study of CSR between China and western countries also unveiled some unique dimensions of CSR in China. In conclusion, CSR manifested in China is different from that in western countries, and China’s CSR is closely related to its social and cultural background.


corporate social responsibility conceptual paradigm inductive analysis indigenous characteristics 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



This research is supported by a grant from the Science Foundation of Renmin University of China (08XNB078) and a grant from the Social Science Foundation of Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China.


  1. Bardin L.: 1993, L’analyse de contenu (Universitaires de France Le Psychologue, Paris).Google Scholar
  2. Basu, K. and G. Palazzo: 2008, ‹Corporate Social Responsibility: A Process Model of Sensemaking’, Academy of Management Review 33(1), 122-136.Google Scholar
  3. Beresford, D. R.: 1973, Compilation of Social Measurement Disclosures in Fortune 500 Annual Report-1973 (Ernst and Ernst, Cleveland)Google Scholar
  4. Beresford, D. R.: 1974, ‹How Companies Are Reporting Social Performance’, Management Accounting 56(2), 41-44.Google Scholar
  5. Beresford, D. R.: 1975, Social Responsibility Disclosure in 1974 Fortune 500 Annual Reports (Ernst and Ernst, Cleveland)Google Scholar
  6. Beresford, D. R.: 1976, Social Responsibility Disclosure -1976 Survey of Fortune 500 Annual Reports (Ernst and Ernst, Cleveland)Google Scholar
  7. Bowen, H. R.: 1953, Social Responsibilities of the Businessman (Harper & Row, New York).Google Scholar
  8. Boxenbaum, E.: 2006, ‹Corporate Social Responsibility as Institutional Hybrids’, Journal of Business Strategies 23(1), 45-63.Google Scholar
  9. Carroll, A.B.: 1979, ‹A Three-dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance’, The Academy of Management Review 4(4), 497-505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Davis, K. and R. L. Blomstrom: 1975, Business and Society: Environment and Responsibility (McGraw-Hill, New York).Google Scholar
  11. Eells, R. and C. Walton: 1961, Conceptual Foundations of Business (Richard D. Irwin, Homewood, Illinois).Google Scholar
  12. Eisenhardt, K (1989) ‹Building Theories from Case Study Research’. The Academy of Management Review 14(4), 532-550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Friedman, M (1962) Capitalism and Freedom (University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar
  14. Gallo, M. A.: 1980, Responsabilidades Sociales de la Empresa (Eunsa: Pamplona) (in Spanish)Google Scholar
  15. Gallo, M.A.: 2004, ‹The Family Business and Its Social Responsibilities’, Family Business Review 17(2), 135-148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Grunig, J. E.: 1979, ‹A New Measure of Public Opinions on Corporate Social Responsibility’, The Academy of Management Journal 22(4), 738-764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Guo, P. and Y. Yu: 2006, ‹The Performance of Social Responsibilities by Means of the Cooperation between Public and Private Enterprises- a Case Study of Programs of Supporting the Poor in China’s Causes of “Helping to Start an Undertaking”‹, Management World 4, 41-47.Google Scholar
  18. Li, Z.: 2006, ‹A Study on Relation of Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Value: Empirical Evidence from Shanghai Securities Exchange’, China industrial Economy 2, 77-83.Google Scholar
  19. Luna Sotorrío, L. and J. L. Fernández Sánchez: 2008, ‹Corporate Social Responsibility of the Most Highly Reputed European and North American Firms’, Journal of Business Ethics 82(2), 379-390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Maignan, I. and O. C. Ferrell: 2000, ‹Measuring Corporate Citizenship in Two Countries: The Case of the United States and France’, Journal of Business Ethics 23(3), 283-297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Maignan, I. and D.A. Ralston: 2002, ‹Corporate Social Responsibility in Europe and the U.S.: Insights from Businesses’ Self- Presentations’, Journal of International Business Studies 33(3), 497-514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Matten, D. and J. Moon: 2008. ‹“Implicit” and “Explicit” CSR: A Conceptual Framework for A Comparative Understanding of Corporate Social Responsibility’, Academy of Management Review 33(2), 404-424.Google Scholar
  23. McGuire, J. W.: 1963, Business and Society (McGraw-Hill, New York).Google Scholar
  24. Neuendorf, K. A.: 2001, The Content Analysis Guidebook (Sage Publications, Inc.).Google Scholar
  25. Jin Pei: 2006, ‹The Survey Report of Corporate Social Responsibility’, Economic Management 3, 13-16.Google Scholar
  26. Zhou, Y. F., W. E. Luo and W. J. Xiao: 2007, ‹Corporate Social Responsibility Behavior and Consumer Responses: The Moderator Effects of Consumer Personal Characteristic and Price Signal’, China Industrial Economy 3, 62-69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sethi, S.P.: 1975, ‹Dimensions of Corporate Social Responsibility’, California Management Review 17(3), 58-64.Google Scholar
  28. Swanson, D.L.: 1995, ‹Addressing a Theoretical Problem by Reorienting the Corporate Social Performance Model’, The Academy of Management Review 20(1), 43-64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tsui, A.S.: 2004, ‹Contributing to Global Management Knowledge: A Case for High Quality Indigenous Research’, Asia Pacific Journal of Management 21(4), 491-513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tsui, A. S., H. Wang, and K. R. Xin: 2006, ‹Organizational Culture in China: An Analysis of Culture Dimensions and Culture Types’, Management and Organization Review 2(3), 345-376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tuzzolino, F. and B.R. Armandi: 1981, ‹A Need-Hierarchy Framework for Assessing Corporate Social Responsibility’, The Academy of Management Review 6(1), 21-28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wartick, S.L.and P. L. Cochran: 1985, ‹The Evolution of the Corporate Social Performance Model’, The Academy of Management Review 10(4), 758-769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Welford, R.: 2005, ‹Corporate Social Responsibility in Europe, North America and Asia: 2004 Survey Results’, The Journal of Corporate Citizenship 17, 33-52.Google Scholar
  34. Wood, D.J.: 1991, ‹Corporate Social Performance Revisited’, The Academy of Management Review 16(4), 697-718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. World Bank: 2005, ‹What does Business Think About Corporate Social Responsibility? Part II’,
  36. Xin, K. R., A. S. Tsui, H. Wang, Z. Zhang, and W. Chen: 2002, ‹Corporate Culture in Chinese State-Owned Enterprises: An Inductive Analysis of Dimensions and Influences’, In Tsui, A. S., and Lau, C. M. (eds), The Management of Enterprises in the People’s Republic of China. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Press, pp 415–436.Google Scholar
  37. Zhou, Y. F., W. E. Luo and W. J. Xiao: 2007, ‹Corporate Social Responsibility Behavior and Consumer Responses: The Moderator Effects of Consumer Personal Characteristic and Price Signal’, China Industrial Economy 3, 62-69.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Philosophy of Management, School of PhilosophyRenmin University of ChinaBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations