Companies are increasingly asked to provide innovative solutions to deep-seated problems of human misery, even as economic theory instructs managers to focus on maximizing their shareholders' wealt

Misery Loves Companies: Rethinking Social Initiatives by Business:

What makes organizations so similar? We contend that the engine of rationalization and bureaucratization has moved from the competitive marketplace to the state and the professions. Once a set of organizations emerges as a field, a paradox arises: rational actors make their organizations increasingly similar as they try to change them. We describe three isomorphic processes-coercive, mimetic, and normative—leading to this outcome. We then specify hypotheses about the impact of resource centralization and dependency, goal ambiguity and technical uncertainty, and professionalization and structuration on isomorphic change. Finally, we suggest implications for theories of organizations and social change.

The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields (Chinese Translation)

I present a complex theoretical explanation that draws on multiple bodies of literature to present an academically rigorous version of a simple argument: good deeds earn chits. I advance/defend three core assertions: (1) corporate philanthropy can generate positive moral capital among communities and stakeholders, (2) moral capital can provide shareholders with insurance-like protection for a firm's relationship-based intangible assets, and (3) this protection contributes to shareholder wealth. I highlight several managerial implications of these core assertions.

/pdf/the-relationship-between-corporate-philanthropy-and-2ninz9mssn.pdf

The Relationship Between Corporate Philanthropy And Shareholder Wealth: A Risk Management Perspective

Although companies are devoting significant resources to corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives, insights into the optimal formulation, implementation, and effectiveness estimation of CSR strategies are currently scarce. This article takes an indepth look at when, why, and how CSR works from a consumer's perspective. In contrast to the simple, monotonie relationships between CSR and consumer purchase behavior evident in marketplace polls, this article proposes a more complex, contingent model of consumer responses to CSR. It articulates both the internal outcomes (e.g., awareness, attitudes, attachment) and external outcomes (e.g., word of mouth, purchase, loyalty) of CSR initiatives for not just the company, but also the consumer and the CSR issue/cause. This article delineates the key factors that are likely to moderate the extent to which the inputs lead to the internal outcomes and the internal outcomes lead to the external ones. This framework can help guide companies in not only formulating and implementing their CSR initiatives, but also measuring the effectiveness of these initiatives.

Doing Better at Doing Good: When, Why, and How Consumers Respond to Corporate Social Initiatives:

Scholars in management and economics widely share the assumption that business firms focus on profits only, while it is the task of the state system to provide public goods. In this view business firms are conceived of as economic actors, and governments and their state agencies are considered the only political actors. We suggest that, under the conditions of globalization, the strict division of labour between private business and nation-state governance does not hold any more. Many business firms have started to assume social and political responsibilities that go beyond legal requirements and fill the regulatory vacuum in global governance. Our review of the literature shows that there are a growing number of publications from various disciplines that propose a politicized concept of corporate social responsibility. We consider the implications of this new perspective for theorizing about the business firm, governance, and democracy.

https://www.springer.com/cda/content/document/cda_downloaddocument/9783834931795-c1.pdf?SGWID=0-0-45-1347110-p174325274

The New Political Role of Business in a Globalized World: A Review of a New Perspective on CSR and its Implications for the Firm, Governance, and Democracy

The practice of corporate philanthropy has evolved significantly over the past several decades and has now become an integral part of corporate strategy. This article identifies an emerging form of corporate community involvement called "Corporate Social Initiatives" (CSI). These programs differ from their predecessors in that they are connected to the firm's core values, responsive to moral pressures, based on the firm's core competencies, and have clear objectives and means of measurement. Firms are adopting these initiatives as a part of a strategy that seeks competitive advantage through reputation assets or as a response to perceived pressures from the moral marketplace. This article explicates the drivers behind the increased interest in CSI, relates CSI to changes in the environment of social expectations for business, reviews potential challenges to CSI programs, and suggests critical factors in the design of successful CSI programs.

/pdf/the-next-wave-of-corporate-community-involvement-corporate-47y6vkxzlp.pdf

The Next Wave of Corporate Community Involvement: Corporate Social Initiatives:

This paper argues that social reporting can be an important form of New Governance regulation to achieve stakeholder accountability. Current social reporting practices, however, fall short of achieving stakeholder accountability and actually may work against it. By examining the success and failures of other transparency programs in the United States, we can identify key factors for ensuring the success of social reporting over the long term. These factors include increasing the benefits-to-costs ratios of both the users of the information and the disclosers, and recognizing the importance of the involvement of third-party intermediaries.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID818544_code397679.pdf?abstractid=818544&mirid=5&type=2

Social Reporting and New Governance Regulation: The Prospects of Achieving Corporate Accountability through Transparency

This paper argues that social reporting can be an important form of New Governance regulation to achieve stakeholder account- ability. Current social reporting practices, however, fall short of achieving stakeholder accountability and actually may work against it. By exam- ining the success and failures of other transparency programs in the United States, we can identify key factors for ensuring the success of social reporting over the long term. These factors include increasing the benefits-to-costs ratios of both the users of the information and the disclosers, and recognizing the importance of the involvement of third-party intermediaries.

/pdf/social-reporting-and-new-governance-regulation-the-prospects-430am9r36p.pdf

Social Reporting and New Governance Regulation: The Prospects of Achieving Corporate Accountability Through Transparency

In this article I examine corporate social reporting as a form of New Governance regulation termed democratic experimentalism. Due to the challenges of regulating the behavior of corporations on issues related to sustainable economic development, New Governance regulation - which has a focus on decentralized, participatory, problem-solving-based approaches to regulation - is presented as an option to traditional command-and-control regulation. By examining the role of social reporting under a New Governance approach, I set out three necessary requirements for social reporting to be effective: disclosure, dialogue with stakeholders, and the moral development of the corporation. I then assess current social reporting practices against these requirements and find significant problems. In response, I propose one option for solving those problems, and encourage future researchers to consider the demands of these three requirements and the possible trade-offs between them when attempting to find ways to improve social reporting practices.

/pdf/the-three-pillars-of-corporate-social-reporting-as-new-1svx1q8nu4.pdf

The Three Pillars of Corporate Social Reporting as New Governance Regulation: Disclosure, Dialogue and Development

In this article I examine corporate social reporting as a form of New Governance regulation termed "democratic experimentalism." Due to the challenges of regulating the behavior of corporations on issues related to sustainable economic development, New Gover- nance regulation—which has a focus on decentralized, participatory, problem-solving-based approaches to regulation—is presented as an option to traditional command-and-control regulation. By examining the role of social reporting under a New Governance approach, I set out three necessary requirements for social reporting to be effective: disclosure, dialogue with stakeholders, and the moral development of the corporation. I then assess current social reporting practices against these requirements and find significant problems. In response, I propose one option for solving those problems, and encourage future researchers to consider the demands of these three requirements and the possible trade-offs between them when attempting to find ways to improve social reporting practices.

/pdf/the-three-pillars-of-corporate-social-reporting-as-new-5076wgjry0.pdf

David Hess

Papers

The Next Wave of Corporate Community Involvement: Corporate Social Initiatives:

Social Reporting and New Governance Regulation: The Prospects of Achieving Corporate Accountability through Transparency

Social Reporting and New Governance Regulation: The Prospects of Achieving Corporate Accountability Through Transparency

The Three Pillars of Corporate Social Reporting as New Governance Regulation: Disclosure, Dialogue and Development

The Three Pillars of Corporate Social Reporting as New Governance Regulation: Disclosure, Dialogue, and Development