In an era of rising concern about financial performance and social ills, companies’ economic achievements and negative externalities prompt a common question: Does it pay to be good? For thirty-five years, researchers have been investigating the empirical link between corporate social performance (CSP) and corporate financial performance (CFP). In the most comprehensive review of this research to date, we conduct a meta-analysis of 251 studies presented in 214 manuscripts. The overall effect is positive but small (mean r = .13, median r = .09, weighted r = .11), and results for the 106 studies from the past decade are even smaller. We also conduct sensitivity analyses to determine whether or not the relationship is stronger under certain conditions. Except for the effect of revealed misdeeds on financial performance, none of the many contingencies examined in the literature markedly affects the results. Therefore, we conclude by considering whether, aside from striving to do no harm, companies have grounds for doing good - and whether researchers have grounds for continuing to look for an empirical link between CSP and CFP.

Does it Pay to Be Good...And Does it Matter? A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship between Corporate Social and Financial Performance

One of the older questions in the debate about Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is whether it is worthwhile for organizations to pay attention to societal demands. This debate was emotionally, normatively, and ideologically loaded. Up to the present, this question has been an important trigger for empirical research in CSR. However, the answer to the question has apparently not been found yet, at least that is what many researchers state. This apparent ambivalence in CSR consequences invites a literature study that can clarify the debate and allow for the drawing of conclusions. The results of the literature study performed here reveal that there is indeed clear empirical evidence for a positive correlation between corporate social and financial performance. Voices that state the opposite refer to out-dated material. Since the beginnings of the CSR debate, societies have changed. We can therefore clearly state that, for the present Western society, “Good Ethics is Good Business.”

/pdf/the-worth-of-values-a-literature-review-on-the-relation-48vw5u67kz.pdf

The Worth of Values – A Literature Review on the Relation Between Corporate Social and Financial Performance

Despite their ethical intentions, ethically minded consumers rarely purchase ethical products (Auger and Devinney: 2007, Journal of Business Ethics
 76, 361–383). This intentions–behaviour gap is important to researchers and industry, yet poorly understood (Belk et al.: 2005, Consumption, Markets and Culture
 8(3), 275–289). In order to push the understanding of ethical consumption forward, we draw on what is known about the intention–behaviour gap from the social psychology and consumer behaviour literatures and apply these insights to ethical consumerism. We bring together three separate insights – implementation intentions (Gollwitzer: 1999, American Psychologist
 54(7), 493–503), actual behavioural control (ABC) (Ajzen and Madden: 1986, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
 22, 453–474; Sheeran et al.: 2003, Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 393–410) and situational context (SC) (Belk: 1975, Journal of Consumer Research
 2, 157–164) – to construct an integrated, holistic conceptual model of the intention–behaviour gap of ethically minded consumers. This holistic conceptual model addresses significant limitations within the ethical consumerism literature, and moves the understanding of ethical consumer behaviour forward. Further, the operationalisation of this model offers insight and strategic direction for marketing managers attempting to bridge the intention–behaviour gap of the ethically minded consumer.

Why Ethical Consumers Don’t Walk Their Talk: Towards a Framework for Understanding the Gap Between the Ethical Purchase Intentions and Actual Buying Behaviour of Ethically Minded Consumers

Ratings of corporations’ environmental activities and capabilities influence billions of dollars of “socially responsible” investments as well as some consumers, activists, and potential employees. In one of the first studies to assess these ratings, we examine how well the most widely used ratings— those of Kinder, Lydenberg, Domini Research & Analytics (KLD)—provide transparency about past and likely future environmental performance. We find KLD “concern” ratings to be fairly good summaries of past environmental performance. In addition, firms with more KLD concerns have slightly, but statistically significantly, more pollution and regulatory compliance violations in later years. KLD environmental strengths, in contrast, do not accurately predict pollution levels or compliance violations. Moreover, we find evidence that KLD’s ratings are not optimally using publicly available data. We discuss the implications of our findings for advocates and skeptics of corporate social

/pdf/how-well-do-social-ratings-actually-measure-corporate-social-456cm2pyfr.pdf

How Well Do Social Ratings Actually Measure Corporate Social Responsibility

A meta-analysis of the relationship between market orientation and business performance: evidence from five continents

This paper investigates the relationship between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and the economic performance of corporations. It first examines the theories that suggest a relationship between the two. To test these theories, measures of CSR performance and disclosure developed by the New Consumer Group were analysed against the (past, concurrent and subsequent to CSR performance period) economic performance of 56 large UK companies. Economic performance included: financial (return on capital employed, return on equity and gross profit to sales ratios); and capital market performance (systematic risk and excess market valuation). The results supported the conclusion that (past, concurrent and subsequent) economic performance is related to both CSR performance and disclosure. However, the relationships were weak and lacked an overall consistency. For example, past economic performance was found to partly explain variations in firms’ involvement in philanthropic activities. CSR disclosure was affected (positively) by both a firm’s CSR performance and its concurrent financial performance. Involvement in environmental protection activities was found to be negatively correlated with subsequent financial performance. Whereas a firm’s policies regarding women’s positions seem to be more rewarding in terms of positive capital market responses (performance) in the subsequent period. Donations to the Conservative Party were found not to be related to companies’ (past, concurrent or subsequent) financial and/or capital performance.

Corporate social responsibility and economic performance in the top British companies: are they linked?

Examines the degree to which leading UK charities have adopted the marketing concept in the last five years and how this has affected their performance. Based on Kohli and Jaworski’s (1990) work, an adaptation of the MARKOR scale was used to measure charities’ orientation towards their markets for funds and volunteers (donors). A mail questionnaire was sent to the top 200 UK charity organizations and a response rate of 29 per cent was achieved. Although charities’ orientation towards their donor market is still relatively low, it has significantly increased in the last five years. No differences in the levels of donor market orientation among different type of charities were observed. Donor market orientation was negatively related to the organizational size and the number of departments. A lag effect between donor market orientation and performance was detected. Discusses limitations and recommendations for future research.

Hugh C. Phillips

Papers

Corporate social responsibility and economic performance in the top British companies: are they linked?

Market orientation in the top 200 British charity organizations and its impact on their performance

How Customers Actually Shop: Customer Interaction with the Point of Sale: