Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Toward Integrative Corporate Citizenship pp 164–187Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

Doing Well by Doing Good: Objective Findings, Subjective Assumptions, or Selective Amplification?

  • Chapter

  • 176 Accesses

Abstract

As the integrative research reviews in the previous three chapters showed, the relationship between corporate social performance (CSP) and corporate financial performance (CFP) has been investigated for over three decades. A meta-analysis (see Chapter 4) shows that the average corrected correlation between CSP and CFP is positive (Orlitzky, Schmidt & Rynes, 2003). However, what previous research reviews failed to examine in depth is the considerable amount of cross-study variability (Ullmann, 1985; Wood & Jones, 1995). In other words, researchers have not conclusively determined why some studies might find economic benefits from CSP while others do not.

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   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   54.99
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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Abbott, W. F. & Monsen, J. R. (1979). On the measurement of corporate social responsibility: Self-reported disclosure as a method of measuring corporate social involvement. Academy of Management Journal, 22, 501– 515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agle, B. R., Mitchell, R. K. & Sonnenfeld, J. A. (1999). Who matters to CEOs? An investigation of stakeholder attributes and salience, corporate performance, and CEO values. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 507– 525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, G. J. & Buchholz, R. A. (1978). Corporate social performance and stock market performance. Academy of Management Journal, 21, 479– 486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. C. & Frankle, A. W. (1980). Voluntary social reporting: An iso-beta portfolio analysis. Accounting Review, 55, 467– 479.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. C. & Frankle, A. W. (1980). Voluntary social reporting: An iso-beta portfolio analysis. Accounting Review, 55, 467– 479.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, R. C. (1998). Mid-course correction: Toward a sustainable enterprise: The Interface model. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aupperle, K. E., Carroll, A. B. & Hatfield, J. D. (1985). An empirical investigation of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 28, 446– 463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, B., Bloor, D. & Henry, J. (1996). Scientific knowledge: A sociological analysis. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron, D. P. (2006). Business and its environment ( 5th ed. ). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bazerman, M. H. (2005). Conducting influential research: The need for prescriptive implications. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 25– 31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belkaoui, A. (1976). The impact of the disclosure of the environmental effects of organizational behavior on the market. Financial Management, 5 (4), 26– 31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beyer, J. M., Chanove, R. G. & Fox, W. B. (1995). The review process and the fates of manuscripts submitted to AMJ. Academy of Management Journal, 38 (5), 1219– 1260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackburn, V. L., Doran, M. & Shrader, C. B. (1994). Investigating the dimensions of social responsibility and the consequences for corporate financial performance. Journal of Managerial Issues, 6 (2), 195– 212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowman, E. H. & Haire, M. (1975). A strategic posture toward corporate social responsibility. California Management Review, 18(2), 49– 58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowman, E. H. (1976). Strategy and the weather. Sloan Management Review, 17, 49– 58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowman, E. H. (1978). Strategy, annual reports, and alchemy. California Management Review, 20(3), 64– 71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bragdon, J. H., Jr. & Marlin, J. A. T. (1972). Is pollution profitable? Risk Management, 19, 9– 18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, B. & Perry, S. (1994). Removing the financial performance halo from Fortune’s “Most Admired Companies”. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 1346– 1359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, B. & Perry, S. (1995). Halo-removed residuals of Fortune’s “responsibility to the community and environment”: A decade of data. Business & Society, 34 (2), 199– 215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burrell, G. & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological paradigms and organisational analysis. London: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burrell, G. (1996). Normal science, paradigms, metaphors, discourses and genealogies of analysis. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy & W. R. Nord (eds), Handbook of organization studies (pp. 642– 658 ). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carr, A. Z. (1968). Is business bluffing ethical? Harvard Business Review, 46, 145– 153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chatterji, A. K. & Levine, D. (2006). Breaking down the wall of codes: Evaluating non-financial performance measurement. California Management Review, 48 (2), 29– 51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, K. H. & Metcalf, R. W. (1980). The relationship between pollution control record and financial indicators revisited. Accounting Review, 55 (1), 168– 177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochran, P. L. & Wood, R. A. (1984). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 27, 42– 56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1994). The Earth is round (p b1.05). American Psychologist, 49, 997– 1003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conine, T. F. & Madden, G. P. (1987). Corporate social responsibility and investment value: The expectational relationship. In W. D. Guth (ed.), Handbook of business strategy 1986/1987 yearbook (pp. 181– 189 ). Boston: Warren, Gorham & Lamont.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook, T. D. & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design & analysis issues for field settings. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, H. M. & Hedges, L. V. (1994). The handbook of research synthesis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, H. M. (1989). Integrating research: A guide for literature reviews (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowen, S. S., Ferreri, L. B. & Parker, L. D. (1987). The impact of corporate characteristics on social responsibility disclosure: A typology and frequency-based analysis. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 12(2), 111– 122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalai Lama, H. H. (1999). Ethics for the new millennium. New York: Riverhead Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, W. N. I. & Worrell, D. L. (1992). Research notes and communications: The effect of product recall announcements on shareholder wealth. Strategic Management Journal, 13, 467– 473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, K. (1973). The case for and against business assumptions of social responsibilities. Academy of Management Journal, 16, 312– 317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, L. (1990). The ethereal hand: Organizational economics and management theory. Academy of Management Review, 15 (3), 369– 381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dooley, R. S. & Lerner, L. D. (1994). Pollution, profits, and stakeholders: The constraining effect of economic performance on CEO concern with stakeholder expectations. Journal of Business Ethics, 13, 701– 711.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Entine, J. (2003). The myth of social investing: A critique of its practices and consequences for corporate social performance research. Organization & Environment, 16, 352– 368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferraro, F., Pfeffer, J. & Sutton, R. I. (2005). Economics language and assumptions: How theories can become self-fulfilling. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 8– 24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feyerabend, P. K. (1978). Science in a free society. London: NLB.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R. A. (1932). Statistical methods for research workers ( 4th ed. ). Edinburgh, Scotland: Oliver & Boyd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fogler, H. R. & Nutt, F. (1975). A note on social responsibility and stock valuation. Academy of Management Journal, 18, 155– 160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun, C. & Shanley, M. (1990). What’s in a name? Reputation building and corporate strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 233– 258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freedman, M. & Jaggi, B. (1982). Pollution disclosures, pollution performance and economic performance. Omega: The International Journal of Management Science, 10(3), 167– 176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freedman, M. & Jaggi, B. (1986). An analysis of the impact of corporate pollution disclosures included in annual financial statements on investors’ decisions. Advances in Public Interest Accounting, 1, 192– 212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, B. M. (2005). The moral consequences of economic growth. New York: Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. (1962). Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. (1970, September 13). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Times Magazine, 33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. (2005). Making philanthropy out of obscenity. Reason, 37 (5), 32– 33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frooman, J. (1997). Socially irresponsible and illegal behavior and shareholder wealth: A meta-analysis of event studies. Business (Sr Society, 36 (3), 221– 249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gans, J. S. & Shepherd, G. B. (1994). How are the mighty fallen: Rejected classic articles by leading economists. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8, 165– 179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghoshal, S. (2005). Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. Academy of Management Learning Sr Education, 4 (1), 75– 91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey, P. C. (2005). The relationship between corporate philanthropy and shareholder wealth: A risk management perspective. Academy of Management Review, 30 (4), 777– 798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graves, S. B. & Waddock, S. A. (1994). Institutional owners and corporate social performance. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 1034– 1046.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greening, D. W. (1995). Conservation strategies, firm performance, and corporate reputation in the U.S. electric utility industry. In Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy (Vol. Supplement 1, pp. 345– 368 ). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, J. J. & Mahon, J. F. (1997). The corporate social performance and corporate financial performance debate: Twenty-five years of incomparable research. Business & Society, 36, 5– 31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, G. S. & Wernerfelt, B. (1989). Determinants of firm performance: The relative importance of economic and organizational factors. Strategic Management Journal, 10, 399– 411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hedges, L. V. & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinze, D. C. (1976). Financial correlates of a social involvement measure. Akron Business and Economic Review, 7 (1), 48– 51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herremans, I. M., Akathaporn, P. & McInnes, M. (1993). An investigation of corporate social responsibility reputation and economic performance. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 18, 587– 604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holliday, C. O., Schmidheiny, S. & Watts, P. (2002). Walking the talk: The business case for sustainable development. San Francisco: Greenleaf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hosmer, L. T. (1999). Somebody out there doesn’t like us: A study of the position and respect of Business Ethics at Schools of Business Administration. Journal of Business Ethics, 22, 91– 106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, M. (1997). How science takes stock: The story of meta-analysis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, J. E. & Schmidt, F. L. (2004). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings ( 2nd ed. ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huselid, M. A. (1995). The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity, and corporate financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 635– 672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingram, R. W. & Frazier, K. B. (1980). Environmental performance and corporate disclosure. Journal of Accounting Research, 18, 614– 622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingram, R. W. (1978). An investigation of the information content of (certain) social responsibility disclosures. Journal of Accounting Research, 16, 270– 285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, R. (1987). The validity of ROI as a measure of business performance. American Economic Review, 77 (3), 470– 478.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, T. M. (1995). Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics. Academy of Management Review,20(2), 404– 437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., Slovic, P. & Tversky, A. (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kedia, B. L. & Kuntz, E. C. (1981). The context of social performance: An empirical study of Texas banks. In L. E. Preston (ed.), Research in corporate social performance and policy (Vol. 3, pp. 133– 154 ). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions (3rd ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts (2nd ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levitt, T. (1958). The dangers of social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 36 (5), 38– 44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy, F. K. & Shatto, G. M. (1980). Social responsibility in large electric utility firms: The case for philanthropy. In L. E. Preston (ed.), Research in corporate social performance and policy (Vol. 2, pp. 237– 249 ). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, E. A. (2006). Business ethics: A way out of the morass. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5 (3), 324– 332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lodahl, J. B. & Gordon, G. (1972). The structure of scientific fields and the functioning of university graduate departments. American Sociological Review, 37, 5 7– 72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Logsdon, J. M. & Wood, D. J. (2002). Reputation as an emerging construct in the Business and Society field: An introduction. Business & Society, 41(4), 365– 370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Long, W. F. & Ravenscraft, D. J. (1984). The misuse of accounting rates of return: comment. American Economic Review, 74, 494– 501.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahon, J. F. (2002). Corporate reputation: A research agenda using strategy and stakeholder literature. Business & Society, 41(4), 415– 445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marcus, A. A. & Goodman, R. S. (1986). Compliance and performance: Toward a contingency theory. In L. E. Preston (ed.), Research in corporate social performance and policy (Vol. 8, pp. 193– 221 ). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCloskey, D. N. (1998). The rhetoric of economics ( 2nd ed. ). Madison, WI: University of Wiscons in Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCloskey, D. N. (2006). The bourgeois virtues: Ethics for an age of commerce. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, J. B., Sundgren, A. & Schneeweis, T. (1988). Corporate social responsibility and firm financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 854– 872.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A. & Siegel, D. (1997). Event studies in management research: Theoretical and empirical issues. Academy of Management Journal, 40 (3), 626– 657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A. & Siegel, D. (2000). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: Correlation or misspecification? Strategic Management Journal, 21, 603– 609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A. & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26, 117– 127.

    Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A., Siegel, D. & Teoh, S. H. (1999). Issues in the use of event study methodology: A critical analysis of corporate social responsibility studies. Organizational Research Methods, 2 (4), 340– 365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, G. (1997). Images of organization (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newgren, K. E., Rasher, A. A., LaRoe, M. E. & Szabo, M. R. (1985). Environmental assessment and corporate performance: A longitudinal analysis using a market-determined performance measure. In L. E. Preston (ed.), Research in corporate social performance and policy (Vol. 7, pp. 153– 164 ). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nola, R. (2003). Rescuing reason: A critique of anti-rationalist views of science and knowledge. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy, state, and utopia. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill, H. M., Saunders, C. B. & McCarthy, A. D. (1989). Board members, corporate social responsiveness and profitability: Are tradeoffs necessary? Journal of Business Ethics, 8, 353– 357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlitzky, M. & Benjamin, J. D. (2001). Corporate social performance and firm risk: A meta-analytic review. Business & Society, 40(4),369–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlitzky, M. & Swanson, D. L. (2002). Value attunement: Toward a theory of socially responsible executive decision making. Australian Journal of Management, 27(Special Issue), 119–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlitzky, M. (2001). Does organizational size confound the relationship between corporate social performance and firm financial performance? Journal of Business Ethics, 33(2), 167–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L. & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24(3), 403– 441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlitzky, M., Swanson, D. L. & Quartermaine, L.-K. (2006). Normative myopia, executives’ personality, and preference for pay dispersion: Toward implications for corporate social performance. Business & Society, 45(2), 149–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orum, A. M. (1990). Sociology’s self-imposed moral dilemma. American Sociologist, 25, 72–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paine, L. S. (2003). Value shift: Why companies must merge social and financial imperatives to achieve superior performance. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parket, I. R. & Eilbirt, H. (1975). Social responsibility: The underlying factors.Business Horizons, 18(3), 5–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patten, D. M. (1990). The market reaction to social responsibility disclosures: The case of the Sullivan Principles signings. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 15(6), 575–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pava, M. L. & Krausz, J. (1995). Corporate responsibility and financial performance: The paradox of social cost. Westport, CT: Quorum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, D. P. & Ceci, S. (1982). Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5, 187– 195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J. (1993). Barriers to the advance of organizational science: Paradigm development as a dependent variable. Academy of Management Review, 18(4), 599– 620.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J. (1998). The human equation: Building profits by putting people first. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., Leong, A. & Strehl, K. (1977). Paradigm development and particularism: Journal publication in three scientific disciplines. Social Forces, 55, 938– 951.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy & society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84 (12), 78– 92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Post, J. E. (ed.). (1991). Research in corporate social performance and policy (Vol. 12 ). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Preston, L. E. (1978). Analyzing corporate social performance: Methods and results. Journal of Contemporary Business, 7, 135– 150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahman, S., Waddock, S. A., Andriof, J. & Husted, B. (eds). (2002). Unfolding stakeholder thinking: Theory, responsibility and engagement. Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reimann, B. C. (1975). Organizational effectiveness and management’s public values: A canonical analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 18, 224– 241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riahi-Belkaoui, A. (1991). Organizational effectiveness, social performance and economic performance. In J. E. Post (ed.), Research in corporate social performance and policy (Vol. 12, pp. 143– 153 ). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, R. W. (1992). Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: An application of stakeholder theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17, 595– 612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rorty, R. (1997). Truth, politics, and ‘post-modernism’. Assen, Netherlands: Van Gorcum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothbard, M. N. (1998). The ethics of liberty. New York: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russo, M. V. & Fouts, P. A. (1997). A resource-based perspective on corporate environmental performance and profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 534– 559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sackett, P. R., Harris, M. M. & Orr, J. M. (1986). On seeking moderator variables in the meta-analysis of correlational data: A Monte Carlo investigation of statistical power and resistance to Type I error. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 302– 310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salancik, G. R. & Pfeffer, J. (1974). The bases and use of power in organizational decisions: The case of a university. Administrative Science Quarterly, 19, 453– 473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, F. L. (1996). Statistical significance testing and cumulative knowledge in psychology: Implications for training and researchers. Psychological Methods, 1, 115– 129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shane, P. B. & Spicer, B. H. (1983). Market response to environmental information produced outside the firm. Accounting Review, 58, 521– 538.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapin, S. & Schaffer, S. (1985). Leviathan and the air pump: Hobbes, Boyle and the experimental life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharfman, M. (1996). The construct validity of the Kinder, Lydenberg Sr Domini social performance ratings data. Journal of Business Ethics, 15 (3), 287– 296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharfman, M. (1996). The construct validity of the Kinder, Lydenberg & Domini social performance ratings data. Journal of Business Ethics, 15 (3), 287– 296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simerly, R. L. (1994). Corporate social performance and firms’ financial performance: An alternative perspective. Psychological Reports, 75, 1091– 1103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simerly, R. L. (1995). Institutional ownership, corporate social performance,and firms’ financial performance. Psychological Reports, 77, 515– 525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, J. G., Powers, C. W. & Gunnemann, J. P. (1972). The ethical investor: Universities and corporate responsibility. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, R. C. (1985). It’s good business. New York: Atheneum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, R. C. (1992). Ethics and excellence: Cooperation and integrity in business. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, R. C. (1999). A better way to think about business: How personal integrity leads to corporate success. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, B. A. & Taylor, S. G. (1987). A within and between analysis of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and financial performance. Akron Business and Economic Review, 18, 7– 18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spicer, B. H. (1978). Investors, corporate social performance and information disclosure: An empirical study. Accounting Review, 53, 94– 111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Starik, M. (1990). Stakeholder management and firm performance: Reputation and financial relationships to U.S. electric utility consumer-related strategies. University of Georgia, Athens.

    Google Scholar 

  • Starik, M. (1995). Should trees have managerial standing? Toward stakeholder status for non-human nature. Journal of Business Ethics., 14, 207– 217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Staw, B. M. (1985). Repairs on the road to relevance and rigor: Some unexplained issues in publishing organizational research. In L. L. Cummings & P. J. Frost (eds), Publishing in the organizational sciences (pp. 96– 107 ). Homewood, IL: Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sturdivant, F. D. & Ginter, J. L. (1977). Corporate social responsiveness: Management attitudes and economic performance. California Management Review, 19(3), 30– 39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, D. L. (1996). Neoclassical economic theory, executive control, and organizational outcomes. Human Relations, 49, 735– 756.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Traub, R. E. (1994). Reliability for the social sciences: Theory and applications (Vol. 3 ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turban, D. B. & Greening, D. W. (1996). Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees. Academy of Management Journal,40(3), 658– 672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ullmann, A. (1985). Data in search of a theory: A critical examination of the relationship among social performance, social disclosure, and economic performance. Academy of Management Review, 10, 540– 577.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Maanen, J. (1995). Style as theory. Organization Science, 6 (1), 133– 143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vance, S. (1975). Are socially responsible firms good investment risks? Management Review, 64 (8), 18– 24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venkatraman, N. & Ramanujam, V. (1987). Measurement of business economic performance: An examination of method convergence. Journal of Management, 13, 109– 122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. A. & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performancefinancial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 303– 319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. A. & Graves, S. B. (1997a). The corporate social performance financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 303– 319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. A. & Graves, S. B. (1997b). Quality of management and quality of stakeholder relations: Are they synonymous? Business & Society, 36 (3), 250– 279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. A. (2003). Myths and realities of social investing. Organization & Environment, 16 (3), 369– 380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wartick, S. L. (1988). How issues management contributes to corporate performance. Business Forum, 13 (2), 16– 22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, E. J., Campbell, D., Schwartz, R., Sechrest, L. & Grove, J. (1981). Nonreactive measures in the social sciences. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willums, J.-O. (1999, May 3). Social responsibility and shareholder value. Business Week, 85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Windsor, D. (2001). “Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective” some comments.Academy of Management Review 26(4), 502–504.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiseman, J. (1982). An evaluation of environmental disclosures made in corporate annual reports. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 7, 53– 63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wokutch, R. E. & Spencer, B. A. (1987). Corporate sinners and saints: The effects of philanthropic and illegal activity on organizational performance. California Management Review, 29, 62– 77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe, R. (1991). The use of content analysis to assess corporate social responsibility. In J. E. Post (ed.), Research in corporate social performance and policy (Vol. 12, pp. 281– 307 ). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, D. J. & Jones, R. E. (1995). Stakeholder mismatching: A theoretical problem in empirical research on corporate social performance. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 3, 229– 267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, D. J. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16, 691– 718.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, D. J. (1995). The Fortune database as a CSP measure. Business (Sr Society, 34, 197– 198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zuckerman, H. (1988). The sociology of science. In N. J. Smelser (ed.), Handbook of sociology (pp. 511– 571 ). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Pennsylvania State University Altoona, USA

    Marc Orlitzky (Associate Professor of Management)

  2. Kansas State University, USA

    Diane L. Swanson (Professor of Management)

Authors
  1. Marc Orlitzky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Diane L. Swanson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 2008 Marc Orlitzky and Diane L. Swanson

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Orlitzky, M., Swanson, D.L. (2008). Doing Well by Doing Good: Objective Findings, Subjective Assumptions, or Selective Amplification?. In: Toward Integrative Corporate Citizenship. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230594708_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation