Advertisement

Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 110, Issue 2, pp 157–172 | Cite as

Stakeholder Pressures as Determinants of CSR Strategic Choice: Why do Firms Choose Symbolic Versus Substantive Self-Regulatory Codes of Conduct?

  • Luis A. Perez-Batres
  • Jonathan P. Doh
  • Van V. Miller
  • Michael J. Pisani
Article

Abstract

To encourage corporations to contribute positively to the environment in which they operate, voluntary self-regulatory codes (SRC) have been enacted and refined over the past 15 years. Two of the most prominent are the United Nations Global Compact and the Global Reporting Initiative. In this paper, we explore the impact of different stakeholders’ pressures on the selection of strategic choices to join SRCs. Our results show that corporations react differently to different sets of stakeholder pressures and that the SRC selection depends on the type and intensiveness of the stakeholder pressures as well as the resources at hand to respond to those pressures. Our contribution offers a more specific and finely variegated analysis of firm-stakeholder interactions.

Keywords

CSR Voluntary codes of conduct Stakeholder pressures KLD SD Pollution-intensive industries Resource discretion 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research is part of a project on International Business and Sustainable Development, which has been funded by a grant from the Title VIb Program of the United States Department of Education for the period 2008–2011 (Award # P153A080011).

References

  1. Akerlof, G. (1970). The market for lemons: Quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84, 488–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aldrich, H. (1979). Organizations and environments. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  3. Allmendinger, J., & Hackman, J. R. (1996). Organizations in changing environments: The case of East German symphony orchestras. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 337–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alvarez-Larrauri, R., & Fogel, I. (2008). Environmental audits as a policy of state: 10 years of experience in Mexico. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(1), 66–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ansari, S. M., Fiss, P. C., & Zajac, E. J. (2010). Made to fit: How practices vary as they diffuse. Academy of Management Review, 35, 67–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Austin, J. E., & Wei-Skillern, J. (2004). Starbucks and Conservation International. Harvard School Business-Teaching Note, 304–100, 1–13.Google Scholar
  7. Bagnoli, M., & Watts, S. (2003). Selling to socially responsible consumers: Competition and the private provision of public goods. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 12, 419–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barnett, M. L., & King, A. A. (2006). Good fences make good neighbors: An institutional explanation of industry self-regulation. In: Best paper proceedings of the academy of management conference, Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
  9. Berchicci, L., & King, A. (2007). Postcards from the edge: A review of the business and environment literature. Academy of Management Annals, 1(1), 513–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Berman, S. L., Wicks, A. C., Kotha, S., & Jones, T. M. (1999). Does stakeholder orientation matter? The relationship between stakeholder management models and firm financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 488–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Berrone, P., Gelabert, L., & Fosfurri, A. (2009). The impact and substantive actions on environmental legitimacy, Working Paper-778 IESE Business School, University of Navarra. http://www.iese.edu/research/pdfs/DI-0778-E.pdf. Accessed Feb 2012.
  12. Blacconiere, W. G., & Patten, D. M. (1994). Environmental disclosures, regulatory costs, and changes in firm value. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 18(3), 357–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Blackman, A. (2008). Can voluntary environmental regulation work in developing countries? Lessons from case studies. Policy Studies Journal, 36(1), 119–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bontis, N., Hulland, J., & Crossan, M. M. (2002). Managing an organizational learning system by aligning stocks and flows. Journal of Management Studies, 39, 437–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Brammer, S. J., Pavelin, S., & Porter, L. A. (2006). Corporate social performance and geographical diversification. Journal of Business Research, 59, 1025–1034.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Brown, B., & Perry, S. (1994). Removing the financial performance halo from fortune’s “most admired” companies. Academy of Management Journal, 37(5), 1347–1359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Buysse, K., & Verbeke, A. (2003). Proactive environmental strategies: A stakeholder management perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 24(5), 453–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Carroll, G. (1984). Organizational ecology. Annual Review of Sociology, 10, 71–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cetindamar, D., & Husoy, K. (2007). Corporate social responsibility practices and environmentally responsible behavior: The case of the United Nations global compact. Journal of Business Ethics, 76, 163–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Chatterji, A. K., Levine, D. I., & Toffel, M. W. (2009). How well do social ratings actually measure corporate social responsibility? Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 18(1), 125–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Chatterji, A. K., & Listokin, S. (2007). Corporate social irresponsibility. Democracy: A Journal of Ideas, 3, 52–63.Google Scholar
  22. Christmann, P. (2004). Multinational companies and the natural environment: Determinants of global environmental policy standardization. Academy of Management Journal, 47(5), 747–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Christmann, P., & Taylor, G. (2001). Globalization and the environment: Determinants of firm self-regulation in China. Journal of International Business Studies, 32(3), 439–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Contractor, F. J., Kundu, S. K., & Hsu, C. (2003). A three-stage theory of international expansion: The link between multinationality and performance in the service sector. Journal of International Business Studies, 34, 5–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Darnall, N., & Carmin, J. (2005). Greener and cleaner? The signaling accuracy of U.S. voluntary environmental programs. Policy Sciences, 38, 71–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Deckop, J. R., Merriman, K. K., & Gupta, S. (2006). The effects of CEO pay structure on corporate social performance. Journal of Management, 32(3), 329–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Delmas, M. A., & Cuerel Burbano, V. (2011). Environmental management and regulatory uncertainty. California Management Review-SI, 54(1), 64–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Dilling, P. F. A. (2010). Sustainability reporting in a global context: What are the characteristics of corporations that provide high quality sustainability reports—An empirical analysis. International Business & Economics Research Journal, 9(1), 19–30.Google Scholar
  29. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1991). Introduction. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 1–38). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  30. Doh, J. P., & Guay, T. R. (2004). Globalization and corporate social responsibility: How nongovernmental organizations influence labor and environmental codes of conduct. Management International Review, 44(3), 7–30.Google Scholar
  31. Doh, J. P., Howton, S. D., Howton, S. W., & Siegel, D. S. (2010). Does the market respond to an endorsement of social responsibility? The role of information, institutions, and legitimacy. Journal of Management, 36(6), 1461–1485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65–91.Google Scholar
  33. Egri, C. P., & Herman, S. (2000). Leadership in the North American environmental sector: Values, leadership styles, and contexts of environmental leaders and their organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 571–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Freeman, R. E., & Reed, D. L. (1983). Stockholders and stakeholders: A new perspective on corporate governance. California Management Review, 25, 88–106.Google Scholar
  35. Frees, E. W. (2006). Longitudinal and panel data: Analysis and applications in the social sciences. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Gamper-Rabindran, S. (2006). NAFTA and the environment: What can the data tell us? Economic Development and Cultural Change, 54(3), 605–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Garz, H., & Volk, C. (2007). GRI reporting: Aiming to uncover true performance. Dusseldorf: West LB Extra-Financial Research.Google Scholar
  38. Gersick, C. J. G. (1994). Pacing strategic change: The case of a new venture. Academy of Management Journal, 37(1), 9–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Godfrey, P., Merrill, C., & Hansen, J. (2009). The relationship between corporate social responsibility and shareholder value: An empirical test of the risk management hypothesis. Strategic Management Journal, 30(4), 425–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hall, J., & Vredenburg, H. (2005). Managing stakeholder ambiguity. MIT Sloan Management Review, 47(1), 10–14.Google Scholar
  41. Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1977). Population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 82(5), 929–964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1984). Structural inertia and organizational change. American Sociological Review, 49, 149–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Hart, S. L. (1995). A natural-resource-based view of the firm. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 986–1014.Google Scholar
  44. Haunschild, P. R., & Miner, A. S. (1997). Modes of interorganizational imitation: The effects of outcome salience and uncertainty. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(3), 472–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Henriques, I., & Sadorsky, P. (1999). The relationship between environmental commitment and managerial perceptions of stakeholder importance. Academy of Management Journal, 42(1), 87–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Hess, D. (2008). The three pillars of corporate social reporting as new governance regulation: Disclosure, dialogue and development. Business Ethics Quarterly, 18(4), 447–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Hillman, A. J., & Keim, G. D. (2001). Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues: What’s the bottom line? Strategic Management Journal, 22(2), 125–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Holt, D., & Barkmeyer, R. (2012). Media coverage of sustainable development issues—Attention cycles or punctuated equilibrium? Sustainable Development, 20(1), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Howard, J., Nash, J., & Ehrenfeld, J. (2000). Standard or smokescreen? Implementation of a voluntary environmental code. California Management Review, 42(2), 63–82.Google Scholar
  50. Jensen, H. B. (2007). From economic to sustainable development: Unfolding the concept of law. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 24, 505–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Jiang, R. H. J., & Bansal, P. (2003). Seeing the need for ISO 14001. Journal of Management Studies, 40(4), 1047–1067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Kell, G. (2005). The global compact selected experiences and reflections. Journal of Business Ethics, 59(1–2), 69–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. King, A. A., & Lenox, M. J. (2000). Industry self-regulation without sanctions: The chemical industry’s responsible care program. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 698–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. King, A. A., Lenox, M. J., & Barnett, M. L. (2002). Policy and the natural environment: Institutional and strategic perspectives. In A. Hoffman & M. Ventresca (Eds.), Organizations, policy and the natural environment: Institutional and strategic perspectives (pp. 393–406). Stanford, CA: University Press.Google Scholar
  55. King, A. A., Lenox, M. J., & Terlaak, A. (2005). The strategic use of decentralized institutions: Exploring certification with ISO 14001 management standards. Academy of Management Journal, 48(6), 1091–1106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Lopez, M. V., Garcia, A., & Rodriguez, L. (2007). Sustainable development and corporate performance: A study based on the Dow Jones sustainability index. Journal of Business Ethics, 75, 285–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Mani, M., & Wheeler, D. (1999). In search of pollution heavens? Dirty industry in the world economy, 1960–1995. In P. Fredriksson (Ed.), Trade global policy and the environment, World Bank discussion paper, #402, (pp. 115–129). Washington: World Bank.Google Scholar
  58. Margolis, J. D., Elfenbein, H. A., & Walsh, J. P. (2007). Does it pays to be good? A meta-analysis and redirection of research on the relationship between corporate social and financial performance. www.stakeholders.bu.edu/Docs/Walsh. Accessed March 2010.
  59. Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 268–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Mason, C., Kirkbride, J., & Bryde, D. (2007). From stakeholders to institutions: The changing face of social enterprise governance theory. Management Decision, 45, 284–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. McMullen, J. S., & Zahra, S. A. (2006). Regulatory focus and executives’ intentions to commit their firms to entrepreneurial action. In Paper presented at the frontiers of entrepreneurship research. Wellesley: Babson College.Google Scholar
  62. McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 117–127.Google Scholar
  63. Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalised organisations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. The American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Minor, D., & Morgan, J. (2011). CSR as reputation insurance: Primum non nocere. California Management Review, 53(3), 40–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886.Google Scholar
  66. Mosakowski, E. (1993). A resource-based perspective on the dynamic strategy-performance relationship: An empirical examination of the focus and differentiation strategies in entrepreneurship firms. Journal of Management, 19(4), 819–839.Google Scholar
  67. Murillo-Luna, J. L., Garces-Ayerbe, C., & Rivera-Torres, P. (2008). Why do patterns of environmental response differ? A stakeholder pressure. Strategic Management Journal, 29(11), 1225–1240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. O’Rourke, J. (2001). Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. and Ford Motor Company: How a product safety crisis ended a hundred-year relationship. Corporate Reputation Review, 4(3), 255–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 145–179.Google Scholar
  70. Pérez-Batres, L. A., Miller, V. V., & Pisani, M. J. (2010). CSR, sustainability and the meaning of global reporting for Latin American Corporations. Journal of Business Ethics, 91, 193–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Pérez-Batres, L. A., Miller, V. V., & Pisani, M. J. (2011). Institutionalizing sustainability: An empirical study of corporate registration and commitment to the United Nations global compact guidelines. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19(8), 843–851.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Pérez-Batres, L. A., Miller, V. V., Pisani, M. J., Henriques, I., & Renau-Sepúlveda, J. A. (2012). Why do firms engage in national sustainability programs and transparent sustainability reporting? Evidence from Mexico’s clean industry program. Management International Review, 52(1), 107–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Phillips, R. A., Berman, S. L., Elms, H., & Johnson-Cramer, M. E. (2010). Strategy, stakeholders and managerial discretion. Strategic Organization, 8(2), 176–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Potoski, M., & Prakash, A. (2005a). Covenants with weak swords: ISO 14001 and facilities’ environmental performance. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management’, 24(4), 745–769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Potoski, M., & Prakash, A. (2005b). Green clubs and voluntary governance: ISO 14001 and firms’ regulatory compliance. American Journal of Political Science, 49(2), 235–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Rabe-Hesketh, S., & Skrondal, A. (2008). Multilevel and longitudinal modeling using stata. College Station, TX: Stata Press.Google Scholar
  77. Rao, H. (1994). The social construction of reputation: Certification contests, legitimization, and the survival of organizations in the American automobile industry, 1895–1912. Strategic Management Journal, 15, 29–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Rasche, A. (2009). Toward a model to compare and analyze accountability standards—The case of the UN global compact. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 16(4), 192–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Reich, R. B. (2007). Supercapitalism: The transformation of business, democracy, and everyday life. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
  80. Rivera, J., de Leon, P., & Koerber, C. (2006). Is greener whiter yet? The sustainable slopes program after five years. Policy Studies Journal, 34(2), 195–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Rondinelli, D., & Berry, M. (2000). Environmental citizenship in multinational corporations: Social responsibility and sustainable development. European Management Journal, 18(1), 70–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Runhaar, H., & Lafferty, H. (2009). Governing corporate social responsibility: An assessment of the contribution of the UN global compact to CSR strategies in the telecommunications industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 84(4), 479–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Sabherwal, R., Hirschheim, R., & Goles, T. (2001). The dynamics of alignment: Insights from a punctuated equilibrium model. Organization Science, 12(2), 179–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  85. Scott, W. R. (2001). Institutions and organizations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  86. Sharfman, M. (1996). The construct validity of the Kinder, Lydenberg & Domini social performance ratings data. Journal of Business Ethics, 15, 287–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Sharma, S. (2000). Managerial interpretations and organizational context as predictors of corporate choice of environmental strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 681–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 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), 773–792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Slaughter, A. M. (2004). A new world order. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  90. Spence, A. M. (1975). The economics of internal organization: An introduction. Bell Journal of Economics, 6(1), 163–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Stevens, J., Steensma, H., Harrison, D., & Cochran, P. (2005). Symbolic or substantive document? The influence of ethics codes on financial executives’ decisions. Strategic Management Journal, 26(2), 181–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Strike, V. M., Gao, J., & Bansal, P. (2006). Being good while being bad: Social responsibility and the international diversification of US firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 37, 850–862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Thomas, D. E., Eden, L., Hitt, M. A., & Miller, S. R. (2007). Experience of emerging market firms: The role of cognitive bias in developed market entry and survival. Management International Review, 47, 845–867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organization in action. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  95. Tietenberg, T. (1998). Disclosure strategies for pollution control. Environmental & Resource Economics, 11, 587–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. United Nations General Assembly. (2005). World Summit Outcome. http://www.who.int/hiv/universalaccess2010/worldsummit.pdf. Accessed April 2010.
  97. Vormedal, I. (2005). Governance through learning: The UN global compact and corporate responsibility. Report No. 7/05. Center for Development and the Environment, University of Oslo, Oslo. http://www.prosus.org/prosusFTP/prosusrep/publications/prosusrep2005_07.pdf. Accessed March 2009.
  98. Voss, G. B., Sirdeshmukh, D., & Voss, Z. G. (2008). The effects of slack resources and environmental threat on product exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal, 51(1), 147–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Waddock, S. (2003). Myths and realities of social investing. Organization and Environment, 16, 369–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18(4), 303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Wang, H., Bi, J., Wheeler, D., Wang, J., Cao, D., Lu, G., & Wang, Y. (2002). Environmental performance rating and disclosure: China’s green-watch program, Policy Research Working Paper 2889. Google Scholar
  102. Weaver, G. R., Treviño, L. K., & Cochran, P. L. (1999). Integrated and decoupled corporate social performance: Management commitments, external pressures, and corporate ethics practices. Academy of Management Journal, 42(5), 539–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Westphal, J. D., & Zajac, E. J. (2001). Decoupling policy from practice: The case of stock repurchasing programs. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46, 202–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. White, A. (2006). Why we need global standards for corporate disclosure. Law and Contemporary Problems, 69(3), 167–186.Google Scholar
  105. Wisner, P. S., & Epstein, M. J. (2005). “Push” and “pull” impacts of NAFTA on environmental responsiveness and performance in Mexican industry. Management International Review, 45(3), 327–347.Google Scholar
  106. World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). (1987). Our common future, The Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). The ‘Brundtland Report’. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  107. Zeger, S. L., & Liang, K. Y. (1986). Longitudinal data analysis for discrete and continuous outcomes. Biometrics, 42(1), 121–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Zott, C., & Huey, Q. N. (2007). How entrepreneurs use symbolic management to acquire resources. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52, 70–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luis A. Perez-Batres
    • 1
  • Jonathan P. Doh
    • 2
  • Van V. Miller
    • 1
  • Michael J. Pisani
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Management, College of Business AdministrationCentral Michigan UniversityMount PleasantUSA
  2. 2.Villanova University School of BusinessVillanovaUSA

Personalised recommendations