Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

CSR committees on boards: the impact of the external country level factors

  • Published:
Journal of Management and Governance Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article explores the spread of corporate social responsibility (CSR) committees in the European countries, examining whether and what country level external conditions can have a positive impact for their presence on boards. CSR committees are becoming increasingly important as tools of corporate governance to fight corruption, protect stakeholders, create shared value in the long run and, in general, reduce company’s exposure to responsibility failures in a context where the management of CSR is even more complicated. Taking into consideration more than 22,000 boards of European companies from 2000 to 2016, we first developed a descriptive analysis on the level of spread of CSR committees, and then quantitatively prove that the non-financial disclosure mandatory requirements have a positive impact on the presence of CSR committees on boards. This study contributes to the prior studies about the extent to which CSR committees have been adopted by companies and to the existing literature about corporate governance and CSR, supports legislators and regulators by information about the more effective actions to encourage companies in CSR committees’ establishment, and suggests companies a special corporate governance structure to better manage their global responsibility towards stakeholders. Finally, this research can be the starting point for future studies about what industry level factors are potential driver for CSR committees on boards.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adger, W. N. (2000). Social and ecological resilience: Are they related? Progress in Human Geography. https://doi.org/10.1191/030913200701540465.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Society for Quality. (2008). What is social responsibility? Why is it important? Online only version: http://asq.org/quality-participation/2008/10/social-responsibility/what-is-social-responsibility-why-is-it-important-on-line-only-version.pdf. Accessed Sept 2018.

  • Amran, A., Lee, S. P., & Devi, S. S. (2014). The influence of governance structure and strategic corporate social responsibility toward sustainability reporting quality. Business Strategy and the Environment, 23(4), 217–235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Antal, A. B., & Sobczak, A. (2007). Corporate social responsibility in France: A mix of national traditions and international influences. Business and Society, 46(1), 9–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aras, G., & Crowter, D. (2008). Governance and sustainability: An investigation into the relationship between corporate governance and corporate sustainability. Management Decision, 46, 433–448.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashforth, B. E., & Gibbs, B. W. (1990). The double-edge of organizational legitimation. Organization Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1.2.177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Audi, R. (2012). Virtue ethics as a resource in business. Business Ethics Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.5840/beq201222220.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayuso, S., & Argandoña, A. (2007). Responsible corporate governance: Towards a stakeholder board of directors? IESE research papers, D/701. Available at http://www.iese.edu/research/pdfs/DI-0701-E.pdf. Accessed June 2018.

  • Balleisen, E. J., & Eisner, M. (2009). The promise and pitfalls of co-regulation: How governments can draw on private governance for public purpose. New Perspectives on Regulation, 127, 133–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17, 99–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berg, B. L. (2001). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkes, F., & Ross, H. (2013). Community resilience: Toward and integrated approach. Society and Natural Resources. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2012.736605.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernhart, M. S., & Maher, F. J. S. (2011). ISO 26000 in practice: A user guide. Milwaukee, WI: ASQ Quality Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, J. (1993). Methodological issues and practices in qualitative research. The Library Quarterly: Information, Community, Policy, 63(4), 431–449.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brondoni, S. (2010). Intangibles, global networks & corporate social responsibility. Symphonya. Emerging Issues in Management. https://doi.org/10.4468/2010.2.01ouverture.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. A., Clark, C., & Buono, A. F. (2016). The united nations global compact: Engaging implicit and explicit CSR for global governance. Journal of Business Ethics, 139(3), 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, J. J., Hoitash, R., & Hoitash, U. (2017). The heterogeneity of board-level sustainability committees and corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3453-2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calvert Asset Management and The Corporate Library. (2010). Board oversight of environmental and social issues: An analysis of current North American practice. http://plusweb.org/Portals/0/DandO%20Material%202011/Board%20Oversight%20of%20Env%20&%20Social%20Issues.pdf. Accessed 30 January 2018.

  • Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business Society, 38, 268–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Center for Business Ethics. (1992). Instilling ethical values in large corporations. Journal of Business Ethics, 11, 863–867. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00076813/34/4.

  • Chan, M. C., Watson, J., & Woodliff, D. (2014). Corporate governance quality and CSR disclosures. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1887-8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, H. J. (2000). The hazard of moral hazard: Untangling the Asian crisis. World Development, 28(4), 775–788.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapple, L., Chen, Z., & Zhang, Y. (2017). Sustainability committee effectiveness and CSR assurance. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2967165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chavance, B. (2008). Formal and informal institutional change: The experience of postsocialist transformation. The European Journal of Comparative Economics, 5(1), 57–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, G., & Xu, L. (2002). Ownership, competition, and corruption: Bribe takers versus bribe payers. World Bank working paper series number 2783. Washington DC: World Bank.

  • Colleoni, E. (2013). CSR communication strategies for organizational legitimacy in social media. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 18(2), 228–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cosma, S., Mastroleo, G., & Schwizer, P. (2017). Assessing corporate governance quality: Substance over form. Journal of Management and Governance. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-017-9395-3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowton, C. J. (1998). The use of secondary data in business ethics research. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(4), 423–434. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005730825103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, D. R., Daily, C. M., Johnson, J. L., & Ellstrand, A. E. (1999). Number of directors and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 674–686.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Luca, F., & Prather-Kinsey, J. (2018). Legitimacy theory may explain the failure of global adoption of IFRS: The case of Europe and the U.S. Journal of Management and Governance, 22, 501–534. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-018-9409-9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deloitte & Touche. (2014). The social and ethics committee and the management of the ethics performance of the company. Johannesburg: Deloitte & Touche.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dienes, D., Sassen, R., & Fischer, J. (2016). What are the drivers of sustainability reporting? A systematic review. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-08-2014-0050.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobija, D. (2015). Exploring audit committee practices: Oversight of financial reporting and external auditors in Poland. Journal of Management and Governance. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-013-9281-6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eberhardt-Toth, E. (2016). Who should be on a board corporate social responsibility committee? Journal of Cleaner Production, 140, 1926–1935.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eccles, R. G., Iannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2014). The impact of corporate sustainability on organizational processes and performance. Management Science, 6, 2835–2857.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eccles, R., Kathleen, M. P., & Serafeim, G. (2012). How to become a sustainable company. MIT Sloan Management Review, 53(4), 43–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21, 1105–1121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elkington, J. (1998). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Gabriola Island: New Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, M., Flamholtz, E. G., & McDonough, J. J. (1976). Corporate social accounting in the United States of America: State of the art and future prospects. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 1, 23–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fama, E. F. (1980). Agency problems and the theory of the firm. The Journal of Political Economy, 88(2), 288–307.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felo, A. J. (2001). Ethics programs, board involvement, and potential conflicts of interest in corporate governance. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010711403915.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folke, C. (2006). Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social–ecological systems analyses. Global Environmental Change. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.04.002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frankfort-Nachmias, C., & Nachmias, D. (1992). Secondary data analysis in research methods in the social sciences (4th ed.). London: Edward Arnold.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E., & Dmytriyev, S. (2017). Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder theory: Learning from each other. Symphonya. Emerging Issues in Management. https://doi.org/10.4468/2017.1.02freeman.dmytriyev.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gabrielsson, J., & Huse, M. (2004). Context, behavior, and evolution: Challenges in research on boards and governance. International Studies of Management and Organization, 34(2), 11–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghecham, M. A. (2006). Formal and informal institutional constraints and the performance of firms in developing economies: The case of Egypt. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=938099 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.938099. Accessed June 2018.

  • Goedhart, M., Koller, T., & Wessels, D. (2015). The real business of business. McKinsey on Finance, 53. Winter.

  • Grant, R. (1991). The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: Implications for strategy formulation. California Management Review, 33, 114–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunderson, L., & Holling, C. S. (2002). Panarchy: Understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. A global perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hakim, C. (1982). Secondary analysis in social research: A guide to data sources and methods with examples. London: Allen and Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hao, D., Qi, G., & Wang, J. (2018). Corporate social responsibility, internal controls, and stock price crash risk: The Chinese stock market. Sustainability, 10(5), 1675.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, H. (2001). Content analysis of secondary data: A study of courage in managerial decision making. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012534014727.

    Google Scholar 

  • He, L., Yang, R., & He, Y. (2017). Does social exchange relationship impair audit committee effectiveness? Journal of Management and Governance. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-017-9385-5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helfaya, A., & Moussa, T. (2017). Do board’s corporate social responsibility strategy and orientation influence environmental sustainability disclosure? UK evidence: Do board CSR strategy and orientation influence ESD? Business Strategy and the Environment, 26(5/6), 1061–1077.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hockerts, K., & Moir, L. (2004). Communicating corporate responsibility to investors: The changing role of the investor relations function. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BUSI.0000033109.35980.16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husted, B. W. (2005). Risk management, real options, and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 60(2), 175–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Institute of Business Ethics. (2016). Culture by committee: The pros and cons. London: Institute of Business Ethics Pub.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, J. C., & Berg, N. (2012). Determinants of traditional sustainability reporting versus integrated reporting. An institutional approach. Business Strategy and the Environment, 21(5), 299–316.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behaviour, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jia, M., & Zhang, Z. (2014). How does the stock market value corporate social performance? When behavioral theories interact with stakeholder theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 125(3), 433–465.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jo, H., & Harjoto, M. A. (2011). Corporate governance and firm value: The impact of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0869-y.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jo, H., & Harjoto, M. A. (2012). The causal effect of corporate governance on corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-1052-1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, S., & Mitton, T. (2003). Cronyism and capital controls: Evidence from Malaysia. Journal of Financial Economics, 67(2), 351–382.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kakabadse, N. K., & Kakabadse, A. P. (2007). Chairman of the board: Demographics effects on role pursuit. Journal of Management Development, 26(2), 169–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kassinis, G., & Vafeas, N. (2002). Corporate boards and outside stakeholders as determinants of environmental litigation. Strategic Management Journal, 23(5), 399–415.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kent, P., & Monem, R. (2008). What drives TBL reporting: Good governance or threat to legitimacy? Australian Accounting Review, 18(4), 297–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Y., Park, M. S., & Wier, B. (2012). Is earnings quality associated with corporate social responsibility? The Accounting Review. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-10209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiron, D., Kruschwitz, N., Haanaes, K., Reeves, M., Fuisz-Kehrbach, S. K., & Kell, G. (2015). Joining forces: Collaboration and leadership for sustainability. MIT Sloan Management Review, 12, 1–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Konadu, R. (2017). Gender diversity impact on corporate social responsibility (CSR) and greenhouse gas emissions in the UK. Economics and Business Review, 3(17), 127–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lentner, C., Szegedi, K., & Tatay, T. (2015). Corporate social responsibility in the banking sector. Public Finance Quarterly, 1, 95–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liao, L., Luo, L., & Tang, Q. (2015). Gender diversity, board independence, environmental committee and greenhouse gas disclosure. British Accounting Review, 47, 409–424.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macus, M. (2008). Board capability: An interactions perspective on boards of directors and firm performance. International Studies of Management and Organization, 38(3), 98–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahmood, Z., Kouser, R., Ali, W., Ahmad, Z., & Salman, T. (2018). Does corporate governance affect sustainability disclosure? A mixed methods study. Sustainability, 10(1), 207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney, L. S., & Thorne, L. (2005). Corporate social responsibility and long-term compensation: Evidence from Canada. Journal of Business Ethics, 57(3), 241–253.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mallin, C., & Michelon, G. (2010). Board reputation attributes and corporate social performance: An empirical investigation of the US best corporate citizens. Accounting and Business Research, 41, 119–144. https://ssrn.com/abstract=1702391.

  • Mallin, C., & Michelon, G. (2013). Monitoring intensity and stakeholders’ orientation: How does governance affect social and environmental disclosure? Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1324-4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marlow, D., Beale, D. J., & Burn, S. (2010). Linking asset management with sustainability: Views from the Australian sector. American Water Works Association, 102(1), 56–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, C., & Simmons, J. (2014). Embedding corporate social responsibility in corporate governance: A stakeholder system approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 119(1), 77–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, P. M. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: Strategic implications. Journal of Management Studies. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00580.x.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melgar, N., Rossi, M., & Smith, T. W. (2010). The perception of corruption. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 22(1), 120–131. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edp058.

    Google Scholar 

  • Methven O’Brien, C., Mehra, A., Blackwell, S., & Poulsen-Hansen, C. B. (2016). National action plans: Current status and future prospects for a new business and human rights governance tool. Business and Human Rights Journal, 1(1), 117–126. https://doi.org/10.1017/bhj.2015.14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340–363.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michelon, G. (2011). Sustainability disclosure and reputation: A comparative study. Corporate Reputation Review, 14(2), 79–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michelon, G., & Parbonetti, A. (2012). The effects of corporate governance on sustainability disclosure. Journal of Management and Governance, 16(3), 477–509.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, K., & Serafeim, G. (Eds.). (2014). Chief sustainability officers: Who are they and what do they do? Leading sustainable change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miras-Rodriguez, M., & Di Pietra, R. (2018). Corporate Governance mechanisms as drivers that enhance the credibility and usefulness of CSR disclosure. Journal of Management and Governance. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-018-9411-2.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, D. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. London: Cambrige University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2015). G20/OECD principles of corporate governance. Paris: OECD Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogus, A. (1995). Rethinking self-regulation. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 15(1), 97–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Othman, S., Darus, F., & Arshad, R. (2011). The influence of coercive isomorphism on corporate social responsibility reporting and reputation. Social Responsibility Journal, 7(1), 118–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulí, E. A., & Castrillo, D. P. (2012). Codes of best practice in competitive markets for managers. Economic Theory, 49(1), 113–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pérez, A. (2015). Corporate reputation and CSR reporting to stakeholders: Gaps in the literature and future lines of research. Corporate Communications: An International Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCIJ-01-2014-0003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, G. F., & Romi, A. M. (2015). The association between sustainability governance characteristics and the assurance of corporate sustainability reports. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-50849.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettigrew, A. (1992). On studying managerial elites. Strategic Management Journal, 13, 163–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M., & Kramer, M. (2011). Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review, 89, 62–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Purcell, T. V. (1985). The ethics of corporate governance. Review of Social Economy, 40(3), 360–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahim, M. M. (2013). Legal regulation of corporate social responsibility. A meta-regulation approach of law for raising CSR in a weak economy. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raynard, M., Johnson, G., & Greenwood, R. (2015). Institutional theory and strategic management. In M. Jenkins & V. Ambrosini (Eds.), Strategic management: A multiple-perspective approach. New York: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, R. W. (1992). Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: An application of stakeholder theory. Accounting, Organization and Society. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(92)90015-K.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, S. (2014). International obligations, state responsibility and judicial review under the OECD guidelines for multinational enterprises regime. Utrecht Journal of International and European Law, 30(78), 68. https://doi.org/10.5334/ujiel.cd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodgers, W., Choy, H. L., & Guiral, A. (2013). Do investors value a firm’s commitment to social activities? Journal of Business Ethics, 114(4), 607–623.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodrigue, M., Magnan, M., & Cho, C. H. (2013). Is environmental governance substantive or symbolic? An empirical investigation. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1331-5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salvioni, D. M. (2018). Corporate governance, ownership and global markets. In S. M. Brondoni (Ed.), Competitive business management. A global perspective. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salvioni, D. M., & Bosetti, L. (2014). Sustainable development and corporate communication in global markets. Symphonya. Emerging Issues in Management. https://doi.org/10.4468/2014.1.03salvioni.bosetti.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salvioni, D. M., & Gennari, F. (2017). CSR, sustainable value creation and shareholder relations. Symphonya. Emerging Issues in Management. https://doi.org/10.4468/2017.1.04salvioni.gennari.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salvioni, D. M., Gennari, F., & Bosetti, L. (2016). Sustainability and convergence: The future of corporate governance systems? Sustainability, 8(11), 1203. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8111203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schein, E. H. (1984). Coming to a new awareness of organizational culture. MIT Sloan Management Review, 25(2), 3–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, M. S., & Carroll, A. B. (2003). Corporate social responsibility: A three-domain approach. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(4), 503–530.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R. (2008). Institutions and organizations: Ideas and interests. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Securities and Exchange Act. (1934). Available at: http://legcounsel.house.gov/Comps/Securities%20Exchange%20Act%20Of%201934.pdf. Accessed Sept 2018.

  • Sims, R. R. (1991). The institutionalization of organizational ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 10(7), 493–506.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, J. (2011). Determinants of the effectiveness of corporate codes of ethics: An empirical study. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00383348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, J. (2012). Beyond corporate social responsibility: Oil multinationals and social challenges, by Frynas Jedrzej George (Cambridge University Press, 2009). Business Ethics Quarterly, 22(4), 782–786.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, D. B. (2010). Corporate social responsibility in the oil and gas industry: The importance of reputational risk. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 86(1), 59–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spitzeck, H. (2009). The development of governance structures for corporate responsibility. Corporate Governance, 9(4), 495–505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Journal, 20(3), 571–610.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative research: Analysis, types and software tools. New York: Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valmohammadi, C. (2014). Impact of corporate social responsibility practices on organizational performance: An ISO 26000 perspective. Social Responsibility Journal, 10(3), 455–479. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-02-2013-0021.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vigneau, L., Humphreys, M., & Moon, J. (2014). How do firms comply with international sustainability standards? Processes and consequences of adopting the global reporting initiative. Journal of Business Ethics, 131(2), 469–486.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vitolla, F., Rubino, M., & de Nuccio, E. (2018). The inverted U-shaped relationship between company size and reporting quality: The Italian case. Corporate Ownership and Control, 15(3), 114–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. (2008). Building a new institutional infrastructure for corporate responsibility. Academy of Management Perspectives, 22(3), 87–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waller, D. S., & Lanis, R. (2009). Corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure of advertising agencies: An exploratory analysis of six holding companies’ annual reports. Journal of Advertising, 38(1), 109–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walls, J. L., Berrone, P., & Phan, P. H. (2012). Corporate governance and environmental performance: Is there really a link? Strategic Management Journal, 33(8), 885–913.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, J., & Dewhirst, H. D. (1992). Boards of directors and stakeholder orientation. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(2), 115–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, E. (2004). An examination of socially responsible firms’ board structure. Journal of Management and Governance. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-004-1107-0.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, J. (1981). Institutionalizing ethics into the corporation. MSU Business Topics, Spring (pp. 47–51).

  • Zang, A. (2012). Evidence on the trade-off between real activities manipulation and accrual-based earnings management. The Accounting Review. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-10196.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics and Management, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy

    Francesca Gennari & Daniela M. Salvioni

Authors
  1. Francesca Gennari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniela M. Salvioni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Francesca Gennari.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Daniela Salvioni declares that she has no conflict of interest. Francesca Gennari declares that she has no conflict of interest.

Research involving human participants and/or animals

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

This article does not contain any studies with human participants.

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables 6 and 7.

Table 6 Country-level analysis, 2000–2016 (number of committees per country on total of committees per year, in percentage)
Full size table
Table 7 Industry-level analysis, 2000–2016 (number of committees per sector on total of committees per year, in percentage)
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gennari, F., Salvioni, D.M. CSR committees on boards: the impact of the external country level factors. J Manag Gov 23, 759–785 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-018-9442-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-018-9442-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation