Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Social Audit Regulation pp 257–279Cite as

Defining a Methodology for Social Audit Based on the Social Responsibility Level of Corporations

  • Chapter

Part of the book series: CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance ((CSEG))

Abstract

Currently, global corporations face a series of challenges in terms of accountability towards the environment and society. One of the ways by which they could deal with these challenges is to introduce the use of social auditing to assist them to improve their reputation and the way they are perceived by all their stakeholders. Unfortunately, there is still no standard methodology for corporations to prepare their social audit report. This chapter seeks to fill this gap. It proposes a standardized methodology based on a disclosure checklist simulated on a range of sustainability/socio-environmental/corporate social responsibility set of information which companies provide in their annual reports. This methodology was developed based on a disclosure analysis using a sample of annual reports of the most responsible corporations worldwide. It was expected that these role model corporations when it comes to the best practice follow the same trendline regarding disclosures on sustainability/social responsibility information.

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

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The aggregated disclosure level (ADL) means the average for the disclosure levels of SA8000 elements: working hours, remuneration, child labour, management systems, disciplinary practices, forced and compulsory labour, health and safety, discrimination, freedom and association and right to collective bargaining. ADL can also be obtained as total disclosures all the companies in a specific industry/subsector.

References

  • ACCA. (2012). Integrating material sustainability information into corporate reports should be a key and critical outcome of Rio+20. Retrieved from http://www.accaglobal.com/en/discover/news/2012/05/sustainability-rio.html

  • Aceituno, F., Ariza, R., & Sanchez, G. (2012). Is integrated reporting determined by a country’s legal system? Journal of Cleaner Production, 44, 44–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, S. (2006). Sustainable development. New York, USA: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balboni A., & Balboni F., (2008). A duopoly model of corporate social responsibility and location choice. Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita’ di Bologna in its series Working Papers

  • Benabou, R., & Tirole, J. (2010). Individual and corporate social responsibility. Economica, 77, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Björn, F. (2012). Development of norms through compliance disclosure. Journal of Business Ethics, 106, 73–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castka, P., Bamber, C. J., Bamber, D. J., & Sharp, J. M. (2004). Integrating corporate social responsibility (CSR) into ISO management systems—in search of a feasible CSR management system framework. The TQM Magazine, 16(3), 216–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Claasen, C., & Roloff, J. (2012). The link between responsibility and legitimacy the case of De Beers in Namibia. Journal of Business Ethics, 107, 379–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clements, P.H., & Brown, G., (2012). Lenses and clocks: Financial stability and systemic risk. A joint paper presented by the United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative (UNEP FI), the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), and The Blended Capital Group (TBCG).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlsrud, A. (2006). How corporate social responsibility is defined: An analysis of 37 definitions. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 15, 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eccles, R., Cheng, B., & Saltzman, D., (2010a). The landscape of integrated reporting reflections and next steps. Harvard Business School, The President and Fellows of Harvard College Cambridge, Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eccles, R., Krzus, M. P., & Tapscott, D. (2010b). One report: Integrated reporting for a sustainable strategy (1st ed.). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eccles, R., Ioannou, I., Serafeim, G., (2012), The impact of a corporate culture of sustainability on corporate behaviour and performance. Working Paper, Harvard Business School. Available online at http://www.hbs.edu/research/pdf/12-035.pdf

  • Fahmi, F. M., & Omar, N. (2005). Corporate reporting on minority shareholders information and its implication on shareholders activism in Malaysia. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 3(1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Falkenberg, J., & Brunsæl, P. (2011). Corporate social responsibility: A strategic advantage or a strategic necessity? Journal of Business Ethics, 99, 9–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun, C. J. (2005). A world of reputation research, analysis and thinking—Building corporate reputation through CSR initiatives: Evolving standards. Corporate Reputation Review, 8(1), 7–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fonseca, A., Macdonald, A., Dandy, E., & Valenti, P. (2011). The state of sustainability reporting at Canadian universities. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 12(1).

    Google Scholar 

  • FTSE International. (2012). Industry classification benchmark. ICB Publications, Available online at: http://www.icbenchmark.com/ICBDocs/FTSE_ICB_Corporate_Brochure.pdf.

  • Garavan, T. N., Heraty, N., Rock, A., & Dalton, E. (2010). Conceptualizing the behavioral barriers to CSR and CS in organizations: A typology of HRD interventions. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 12(5), 587–613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R. (2001). Thirty years of social accounting, reporting and auditing: What (if anything) have we learnt? Business Ethics: A European Review, 10(1), 9–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R. (2006). Social, environmental and sustainability reporting and organisational value creation?: Whose value? Whose creation? Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 19(6), 793–819.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • GRI. (2013). The external assurance of. Global Reporting Initiative.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gyves, S., & O’Higgins, E. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: An avenue for sustainable benefit for society and the firm? Society and Business Review, 3(3), 207–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, D. U., & Rasche, A. (2007). Discourse ethics and social accountability: The ethics of SA 8000. Business Ethics Quarterly, 17(2(Apr., 2007)), 187–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Göbbels, M., & Jonker, J. (2003). AA1000 and SA8000 compared: A systematic comparison of contemporary accountability standards. Managerial Auditing Journal, 18(1), 54–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins, M. (2003). The Planetary Bargain—CSR Matters. London: Earthscan. http://www.iso.org/iso/social_responsibility.

  • Htaybat, K. (2011). Corporate online reporting in 2010: A case study in Jordan. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 9(1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolk, A. (2003). Trends in sustainability reporting by the Fortune Global 250. Business Strategy and the Environment, 12(2003), 279–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolk, A., & Perego, P. (2010). Determinants of the adoption of sustainability assurance statements: An international investigation. Business Strategy and the Environment, 19(3), 182–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • KPMG. (2008). International survey of corporate responsibility reporting 2008. KPMG International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreps, T. (1940). Measurement of the social performance of business. Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhlman, T., & Farrington, J. (2010). What is sustainability? Sustainability, 2, 3436–3448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lanoizelée, Q. F. (2011). Are competition and corporate social responsibility compatible?: The myth of sustainable competitive advantage. Society and Business Review, 6(1), 77–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lea, R. (2002). Corporate social responsibility, Institute of Directors (IoD) member opinion survey. London: IoD. http://www.epolitix.com/data/companies/images/Companies/Institute-of-Directors/CSR_Report.pdf [23 June 2003].

  • Leonard, D., & McAdam, R. (2003). Corporate social responsibility. Quality progress. Available online at http://alexandrow.pdforms.texas-quality.org/SiteImages/125/Reference%20Library/Social%20Responsibility%20-%20Leonard.pdf

  • Lozano, R. (2009). Orchestrating organisational change for corporate sustainability. Strategies to overcome resistance to change and to facilitate institutionalization. (PhD Doctoral thesis, Cardiff University, Cardiff).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lonzano, R., & Huisingh, D. (2011). Journal of Cleaner Production, 19(2–3), 99–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loew, T., Ankele, K., Braun, S, Clausen, J. (2004). Significance of the CSR debate for sustainability and the requirements for companies. Institute fo Ecological Economy Research, Available online at http://www.ioew.de/uploads/tx_ukioewdb/future-IOEW_CSR-Study_Summary.pdf

  • Mandelbaum, M., & Friedman, T. (2009). What are the barriers to mass adoption of sustainability? SEMIOSIS Communications. Retrieved from http://www.semiosiscommunications.com/barriers-to-sustainability-adoption/

  • Marsden, C. (2000). The new corporate citizenship of good business: Part of the solution to sustainability. Business and Society Review, 105(1), 9–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinuzzi, A. (2011). Responsible Competitiveness—Linking CSR and competitive advantage in three European Industrial Sectors. Zeitschrift für Umweltpolitik & Umweltrecht, 3, 297–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merce, B., & Simon, A. (2009). Multiple standards: Is this the future for organizations?—Sub-theme 15: Multiplicity and plurality in the World of standards. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17(8), 742–750.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MHC International. (2008). National Social Responsibility Index (NSRI). Retrieved from: http://mhcinternational.com/images/stories/national_social_responsibility_index.pdf

  • Michael, J. (2009). Best practice CS&R reporting in the Real Estate Industry. Global MBA Graduate. Ryerson University Toronto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montiel, I. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and corporate sustainability, Separate Pasts, Common Futures. Organization & Environment, 21(3), 245–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicol, A. (2000, April). Adopting a sustainable livelihoods approach to Water Projects: Implications for policy and practice, Working paper. London, UK: Overseas Development Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nidumolu, R., Prahalad, C. K., Rangaswami, M. R. (2009). Why sustainability is now the key driver of innovation?. Harvard Business Review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oba, V. C. (2011). The impact of corporate social responsibility on market value of quoted Conglomerates in Nigeria. ICAN Journal of Accounting and Finance, 3, 64–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, J. (1996). Measuring social wealth: A study of social audit practice for community and cooperative enterprises. New Economics Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, J., Raynard, P., & Zadek, S. (1996). Workbook on social auditing for small organizations. New Economics Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Percy Smith, J., & Hawtin, P. (2007). Community proofing—A practical guide. Berkshire: Open University Press McGraw-Hill Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinney, C., (2001). Imagine speaks out. How to manage corporate social responsibility and reputation in a global marketplace: The challenge for Canadian business. http://www.imagine.ca/content/media/team_canada_china_paper.asp?section=media=media [23 June 2003].

  • Policy Research Unit. (1990). Finding out about your community: How to do a social audit. Leeds Metropolitan University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Radley, Y. (2012). The value of extra- financial disclosure. What investors and analysts said, Accounting for Sustainability, Global Reporting Initiative. https://www.globalreporting.org/information/news-and-press-center/Pages/Investors-and-analysts-use-extra-financial-information-in-decision-making-suggests-new-research.aspx

  • Reynolds, M. A., & Yuthas, K. (2008). Moral discourse and corporate social responsibility reporting. Journal of Business Ethics, 78(1–2), 47–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, J., & Tinker, J. (1998). Reconciling ecological, economic and social imperatives. In J. Schnurr & S. Holtz (Eds.), The Cornerstone of development: Integrating environmental, social and economic policies. Ottawa: International Development Research Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selvi, Y., Wagner, E., & Türel, A. (2010). Corporate social responsibility in the time of financial crisis: Evidence from Turkey. Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, 12(1), 281–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Signes, P., Segarra, O. M., Jimenez, M., & Vargas, M. (2013). Influence of the environmental, social and corporate governance ratings. International Journal of Environmental Research, 7, 105–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Social Accountability International. (2008). Social accountability 8000, International Standard. Available online: http://www.sa-intl.org/_data/n_0001/resources/live/2008StdEnglishFinal.pdf

  • Szegedi, K. (2010). The concept and development tendencies of corporate social responsibility. Club of Economics in Miskolc TMP, 5, 67–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • SAI. (2014). SA8000. Revised version http://www.sa-intl.org/_data/n_0001/resources/live/SA8000_SideBySide_12_16_%202013.pdf

  • Tarí, J. J. (2011). Research into quality management and social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 102, 623–638.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tovey, H. (2009). Sustainability: A platform for debate. Sustainability, 1(1), 14–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNDP. (2013). Human development Report 2013. Retrieved from: http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/reports/14/hdr2013_en_complete.pdf

  • Unerman, J., Bebbingto, J., & O’Dwyer, B. (2010). Sustainability accounting and accountability. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veltri, S., & Nardo, M. T. (2013). The Intangible Global Report: An integrated corporate communication framework. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 18(1), 26–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vidal, N.G., & Kozak R.A. (2009, August). From forest certification to corporate responsibility: Adapting to changing global competitive factors. Proceedings of the XIII World Forestry Congress 2009: Forests in Development—A Vital Balance, Buenos Aires, Argentina, Proceedings 9 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallage, P. (2000). Assurance on sustainability reporting: An auditor’s view. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 19(1), 53–65. Supplement 2000.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (2013). Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI). Retrieved from http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/index.aspx#reports

  • Zadek, S., Evans, R., & Pruzan, P. (2013). Building corporate accountability: Emerging practice in social and ethical accounting and auditing. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was co-financed by the European Social Fund through Sectoral Operational Programme Human Resources Development 2007–2013, project number POSDRU/159/1.5/S/142115 Performance and excellence in doctoral and postdoctoral research in Romanian economics science domain for which the two authors are grateful.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Babes-Bolyai University, Lacramioarelor 4, Cluj-Napoca, Romania

    Adriana Tiron-Tudor, Ioana-Maria Dragu, George Silviu Cordos & Tudor Oprisor

Authors
  1. Adriana Tiron-Tudor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ioana-Maria Dragu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. George Silviu Cordos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tudor Oprisor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ioana-Maria Dragu .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. QUT Business School, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

    Mia Mahmudur Rahim

  2. London Guildhall Faculty of Business and Law, London Metropolitan University, London, United Kingdom

    Samuel O. Idowu

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Tiron-Tudor, A., Dragu, IM., Cordos, G.S., Oprisor, T. (2015). Defining a Methodology for Social Audit Based on the Social Responsibility Level of Corporations. In: Rahim, M., Idowu, S. (eds) Social Audit Regulation. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15838-9_13

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation