Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Developing Corporate Governance with CSR

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Corporate Social Responsibility

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

  • 5004 Accesses

Abstract

The complexity of corporate governance and the need to consider a set of various economic, social, legal, historical and cultural determinants lead to the development of different research perspectives. Despite the multi-theme approaches the concept of shareholder value, the fundamental assumption of principal-agent theory, appeared to become the paradigm for research of the efficiency of corporate governance mechanisms and evolution and gave rise to many regulations or best practice. In result, the proponents of corporate social responsibility and the broader role of the company in the economy seemed to loose in the conceptual debate. Yet, however the devastating impact of the crisis and the growing companies’ and stakeholders’ interests in CSR programs lead to the paradigm shift. Corporate governance inefficiencies identified with the outbreak of the financial crisis cast doubt not only on the effectiveness of the shareholder value approach, but also on many practices adopted in the areas of board work, executive compensation, performance evaluation and transparency. The development of the CSR concept contributed to the understanding of the company role in economy and society and exerted significant impact on theoretical framework and practice of corporate governance. The influence of CSR on corporate governance not only assured for the ‘back to the basics’ but also questioning some previously recognized assumption indicated areas of change.

The proposed article focuses on the CSR impact on the theory and practice of corporate governance. Its aim is to identify several areas of corporate governance such as orientation for shareholder values maximization, board work, executive compensation, performance measure and transparency and to show how these area changed in result of the development of CSR.

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

Access this chapter

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 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
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

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alchian, A., & Demsetz, H. (1973). The property rights paradigm. Journal of Economic History, 33, 16–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, F., & Gale, D. (2000). Comparing financial systems. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, R., & Associates. (2010). Risk management and corporate governance, OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bainbridge, S. (2012). Corporate governance after the financial crisis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bebchuk, L., & Fried, J. (2010). Paying for long-term performance. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 158, 1915–1959.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beltratti, A. (2005). The complementarity between corporate governance and corporate social responsibility. The Geneva Papers, 30, 373–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, B. (1998). Shareholder activism and corporate governance in the United States. In P. Newman (Ed.), The new Palgrave dictionary of economics and the law (pp. 459–465). New York: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair, M., & Stout, L. (1999). A team production theory of corporate law. Virginia Law Review, 85(2), 248–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Canadian Business. (2003). Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility, no. 76, September 15, pp. 83–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management, The Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497–505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, T., & Chanlat, J. (2009). Introduction: A new order? The recurring crisis in Anglo-American corporate governance and the increasing impact on European economies and institutions. In T. Clarke & J. F. Chanlat (Eds.), European corporate governance. Readings and perspectives (pp. 1–42). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clement-Jones, T. (2004). Corporate social responsibility – bottom-line issue or public relation exercise. In J. Hancock (Ed.), Investing in corporate social responsibility (pp. 5–14). London: British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coase, R. (1937). The nature of the firm. Economica, 16(4), 386–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • COM. (2002). 347, final.

    Google Scholar 

  • Core, J., Holthausen, R., & Larcker, D. (1999). Corporate governance, chief executive officer compensation and firm performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 51, 371–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crowther, D., & Jatana, R. (2005). Is CSR profitable? In D. Crowther & R. Jatana (Eds.), Representations of social responsibility (Vol. I, pp. 1–33). Hyderabad: ICAFI University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, G., & Cobb, J. (2010). Resource dependence theory: Past and future. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 28, 21–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deakin, S., & Reberioux, A. (2009). Corporate governance, labor relations and human resource management in the UK and France: Convergence or Divergence. In J.-P. Touffut (Ed.), Does company ownership matter? (pp. 126–150). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Demsetz, H., & Lehn, K. (1985). The structure of corporate ownership: Causes and consequences. Journal of Political Economy, 93, 1155–1177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denis, D., & McConnell, J. (2003). International corporate governance. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 38(1), 1–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Djankov, S., Glaeser, E., La Porta, R., Loper-de-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. (2003). The new comparative economics. Journal of Comparative Economics, 31, 595–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doidge, C., Karolyi, A., & Stulz, R. (2007). Why do countries master so much for corporate governance? Journal of Financial Economics, 86, 1–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. (2008). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concept, evidence and implications. In A. Crane, D. Matten, & L. Spence (Eds.), Corporate social responsibility (pp. 139–165). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fama, E., & Jensen, M. (1983a). Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, XXVI, 301–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fama, E., & Jensen, M. C. (1983b). Agency problems and residual claims. Journal of Law and Economics, XXVI, 327–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fligstein, N., & Choo, J. (2005). Law and corporate governance, Law and corporate governance. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 1, 61–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FRC. (2010). Implementation of the UK stewardship code, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. (2005). A stakeholder theory of the modern corporation. In F. Allhof & A. Vaidya (Eds.), Business ethics (Vol. 1, pp. 253–264). New York: SAGE Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R., & Reed, L. (1983). Stockholders and stakeholders: A new perspective on corporate governance. California Management Review, 5(3), 88–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston, MA: Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillespie, J., & Zweig, D. (2010). Money for nothing: How the failure of corporate boards is ruining American business and costing us trillions. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. The American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, D. E. (2006). Balancing tomorrow’s sustainability and today’s profitability. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, A., Withers, M., & Collins, B. (2009). Resource dependence theory: A review. Journal of Management, 35(6), 1404–1427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollingsworth, J., Schmitter, P., & Streeck, W. (1994). Capitalism, sectors, institutions and performance. In J. Hollingsworth, P. Schmitter, & W. Streeck (Eds.), Governing capitalist economies (pp. 3–16). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • House of Commons. (2009). Banking crisis: Reforming corporate governance and pay in the City, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Idemudia, U. (2011). Corporate social responsibility and developing countries: Moving the critical CSR research agenda in Africa forward. Progress in Development Studies, 11(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jamali, D., Safieddine, A., & Rabbath, M. (2008). Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility synergies and interrelationship. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 16, 443–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M., & Zajac, E. (2004). Corporate elites and corporate strategy: How demographic preferences and structural position shape the scope of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 25, 507–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhndt, M., & Tuncer, B. (2007). Sustainability as a business challenge: The concept of responsible corporate governance. In R. Bleischwitz (Ed.), Corporate governance of sustainability (pp. 8–25). Northhampton: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larcker, D., & Tayan, B. (2011). Corporate governance matters. A closer look at organizational choices and their consequences. New Jersey: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazonick, W., & O’Sullivan, M. (2000). Maximizing shareholder value: A new ideology for corporate governance. Economy and Society, 29(1), 13–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipman, F. (2007). Summary of major corporate governance principles and best practices. International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, 4(4), 309–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lorsch, J., & MacIver, E. (1989). Pawns or potentates: The reality of America’s corporate boards. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mace, M. (1971). Directors: Myth and reality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mallin, C. (2004). Corporate governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mallin, C. (2010). Institutional and other shareholders. In H. Baker & R. Anderson (Eds.), Corporate governance: A synthesis of theory, research and practice (pp. 391–408). Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, C. (2012). Firm commitment: Why the corporation is failing us and how to restore trust in it. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milton, S. (2010). Some observations on CSR and strategic management. Budapest Management Review, 41(2), 59–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monks, R., & Minow, N. (2004). Corporate governance. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moon, J., Orlitzky, M., & Whelan, G. (Eds.). (2010). Corporate governance and business ethics. Northampton: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neal, A. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: Governance gain or laissez-faire figleaf. Comparative Labor Law and Policy Journal, 29, 459–474.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, I. (1978). The external control of organizations. New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prieto-Carron, M., Lund-Thomsen, P., Chan, A., Muro, A., & Bhushan, C. (2006). Critical perspectives on CST and development: what we know, what we don’t know and what we need to know’. International Affairs, 82(5), 977–987.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riyanto, Y., & Toolsema, L. (2007). Corporate social responsibility in a corporate governance framework, Department of Economics Working Paper no. 0702, National University of Singapore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, C., & Crittenden, W. (2004). Mapping moral philosophies: Strategic implications for multinational firms. Strategic Management Journal, 24, 385–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roe, M. (2003). Political determinant of corporate governance. Political context, corporate impact. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • SEC. (2010). Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. (1997). A survey of corporate governance. Journal of Finance, 52, 737–783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stout, L. (2012). The shareholder value myth: How putting shareholders first harms investors, corporations and the public. San Francisco: Berrett-Kohler Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stulz, R., & Williamson, R. (2003). Culture, openness and finance. Journal of Financial Economics, 70, 313–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thiel, M. (2009). Enhancing organizational performance through strategic initiatives. Handbook of Management Cases, Sahibabad, Institute of Management Education, pp. 141–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tricker, B. (2011). Corporate governance. Principles, policies and practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turnbull, S. (1994). Stakeholder democracy: Redesigning the governance of firms and bureaucracies. Journal of Socio–Economics, 23(3), 321–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verdeyen, V., Put, J., & van Buggenhout, B. (2004). A social stakeholder model. International Journal of Social Welfare, 13, 325–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westphal, J., & Zajac, E. (2001). Decoupling policy from practice: the case of tock repurschase programs. Administrative Science Quaterly, 46(2), 202–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westphal, J., & Zajac, E. (2013). A behavioral theory of corporate governance: Explicating the mechanisms of socially situated and socially constituted agency. Academy of Management Annals, 7(1), 607–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler, D., & Davies, R. (2007). Why corporate governance ratings do not predict future value. Evidence from Toronto Stock Exchange listings 2002–2005. In S. Benn & D. Dunphy (Eds.), Corporate governance and sustainability: Challenges for theory and practice (p. 63). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. (1991). Comparative economic organization: The analysis of discrete structural alternatives. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 269–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, B. (1999). The effects of agency problems on the financial behavior, performance and efficiency of German industrial stock corporations. Frankfurt: Peter Lang Europäischer Verlag der Wissenschaften.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Warsaw School of Economics, Warszawa, Poland

    Maria Aluchna

Authors
  1. Maria Aluchna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria Aluchna .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Applied Social Studies, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, United Kingdom

    Stephen Vertigans

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

    Samuel O. Idowu

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Aluchna, M. (2017). Developing Corporate Governance with CSR. In: Vertigans, S., Idowu, S. (eds) Corporate Social Responsibility. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-35083-7_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation