Building on earlier work on the relationship between corporate social performance (CSP) and a firm’s financial performance, this integrative empirical study supports the theoretical argument that the higher a firm’s CSP the lower its financial risk. Specifically, the relationship between CSP and risk appears to be one of reciprocal causality, because prior CSP is negatively related to subsequent financial risk, and prior financial risk is negatively related to subsequent CSP. Additionally, CSP is more strongly correlated with measures of market risk than measures of accounting risk. Of all CSP measures, reputation for social responsibility appears to be the most important one in terms of its risk implications.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aldag, R. J.
, & Bartol, K. M. (1978). Empirical studies of corporate social performance and policy: A survey of problems and results. In L. E. Preston (Ed.), Research in corporate social performance and policy: Vol. 1(pp. 165-199). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
2.
Alexander, G. J.
, & Buchholz, R. A. (1978). Corporate social performance and stock market performance. Academy of Management Journal, 21, 479-486. (H1, H2, H3, H6)
3.
Arlow, P.
,& Gannon, M. J. (1982). Social responsiveness, corporate structure, and economic performance. Academy of Management Review, 7, 235-241.
4.
Auger, P.
, Devinney, T. M., & Louviere, J. J. (1999). Wither ethical consumerism: Do consumers value ethical attributes?(AGSM Working Paper 99-006). Sydney, Australia: Australian Graduate School of Management.
5.
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. (H1, H2, H6)
6.
Baird, I. S.
, & Thomas, H. (1985). Toward a contingency model of strategic risk taking. Academy of Management Review, 10, 230-243.
7.
Baldwin, S. A.
, Tower, J. W., Litvak, L., Karpen, J. F., Jackson, H. F., & McTigue, B. (1986). Pension funds and ethical investment. New York: Council on Economic Priorities. (H1, H2, H6)
8.
Berman, S. L.
, Wicks, A. C., Kotha, S., & Jones, T. M. (1999). Does stakeholder orientation matter? The relationshipbetween stakeholder management models and firm financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 488-506.
9.
Bettis, R. A.
,& Thomas, H. (1990). Risk, strategy, and management. Greenwich, CT: JAI.
10.
Bloom, M.
,& Milkovich, G. T. (1998). Relationships among risk, incentive pay, and organizational performance. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 283-297.
11.
Bowman, E. H.
(1980). Arisk/return paradox for strategic management. Sloan Management Review, 21(3), 17-31.
12.
Bowman, E. H.
(1982). Risk seeking by troubled firms. Sloan Management Review, 23(4), 33-42.
13.
Bowman, E. H.
(1984). Content analysis of annual reports for corporate strategy and risk. Interfaces, 14, 61-72.
14.
Bradbury, H.
,& Clair, J. A. (1999). Promoting sustainable organizations with Sweden’s Natural Step. Academy of Management Executive, 13(4), 63-74.
15.
Brealey, R.
,& Myers, S. (1981). Principles of corporate finance. NewYork: McGraw-Hill.
16.
Brigham, E. F.
, & Gapenski, L. C. (1996). Intermediate financial management(5th ed.). Orlando, FL: Dryden.
17.
Brown, B.
, & Perry, S. (1994). Removing the financial performance halo from Fortune’s “Most Admired Companies.”Academy of Management Journal, 37, 1346-1359.
18.
Brown, B.
, & Perry, S. (1995). Halo-removed residuals of Fortune’s “responsibility to the community and environment”: A decade of data. Business & Society, 34, 199-215.
19.
Burgstahler, D.
,& Dichev, I. (1997). Earnings management to avoid earnings decreases and losses. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 24(1), 99-126.
20.
Chatterjee, S.
, Lubatkin, M. H., & Schulze, W. S. (1999). Toward a strategic theory of risk premium: Moving beyond CAPM. Academy of Management Review, 24, 556-567.
21.
Chen, K. H.
, & Metcalf, R. W. (1980). The relationshipbetween pollution control record and financial indicators revisited. Accounting Review, 55, 168-177. (H1, H2, H6)
22.
Clarkson, M.B.E.
(1988). Corporate social performance in Canada, 1976-86. In L. E. Preston (Ed.), Research in corporate social performance and policy: Vol. 10(pp. 241-265). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
23.
Clarkson, M.B.E.
(1995). A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 20, 92-117.
24.
Coase, R. H.
(1937). The nature of the firm. Economica, 4, 386-405.
25.
Cook, T. D.
, & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
26.
Cooper, H. M.
(1989). Integrating research: A guide for literature reviews(2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
27.
Cronbach, L. J.
, Gleser, G. C., Nanda, H., & Rajaratnam, N. (1972). The dependability of behavioral measurements: Theory of generalizability of scores and profiles. New York: Wiley.
28.
Donaldson, L.
(1999). Performance-driven organizational change: The organizational portfolio. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
29.
Donaldson, T.
,& Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20, 65-91.
30.
Entine, J.
(1994, September/October). Shattered image: Is The Body Shop too good to be true?Business Ethics, 23-28.
31.
Fiegenbaum, A.
, & Thomas, H. (1988). Attitudes toward risk and the risk-return paradox. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 85-106.
32.
Fombrun, C.
, & Shanley, M. (1990). What’s in a name? Reputation building and corporate strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 233-258. (H1, H2, H3, H5, H6)
33.
Frederick, W. C.
(1995). Values, nature, and culture in the American corporation. NewYork: Oxford University Press.
34.
Frooman, J.
(1997). Socially irresponsible and illegal behavior and shareholder wealth: A meta-analysis of event studies. Business & Society, 36, 221-249.
35.
Graves, S. B.
, & Waddock, S. A. (1994). Institutional owners and corporate social performance. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 1034-1046. (H1, H2, H6)
36.
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.
37.
Harrison, J. S.
, & Freeman, R. E. (1999). Stakeholders, social responsibility, and performance: Empirical evidence and theoretical perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 479-487.
38.
Hedges, L.
(1986). Issues in meta-analysis. In E. Rothkopf (Ed.), Review of research in education(Vol. 13, pp. 353-398). Washington, DC: American Research Association.
39.
Hedges, L.
(1987). How hard is hard science, how soft is soft science: The empirical cumulativeness of research. American Psychologist, 42, 443-455.
40.
Heinze, D. C.
(1976). Financial correlates of a social involvement measure. Akron Business and Economic Review, 7(1), 48-51. (H1, H2, H6)
41.
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. (H1, H2, H3, H6)
42.
Hill, C.W.L.
(1990). Cooperation, opportunism, and the invisible hand: Implications for transaction cost theory. Academy of Management Review, 15, 500-513.
43.
Hoffman, A. J.
(1999). Institutional evolution and change: Environmentalism and the U.S. chemical industry. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 351-371.
44.
Hosmer, L. T.
(1995). Trust: The connecting link between organizational theory and philosophical ethics. Academy of Management Review, 20, 379-403.
45.
Huber, P. J.
(1980). Robust statistics. New York: John Wiley.
46.
Hunter, J. E.
,& Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting errors and bias in research findings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
47.
Jones, T. M.
(1995). Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics. Academy of Management Review, 20, 404-437.
48.
Kelly, M.
(1994, September/October). To tell the truth. Business Ethics, 6-8.
49.
King, A.
(1995). Avoiding ecological surprise: Lessons from long-standing communities. Academy of Management Review, 20, 961-985.
50.
Kirsner, S.
(1998, March). Inside the WSJ interactive edition: A day in the life of a world famous Web site. Editor & Publisher, 4-9.
51.
Kleinbaum, D. G.
, Kupper, L. L., & Muller, K. E. (1988). Applied regression analysis and other multivariate methods. Belmont, CA: Duxbury.
52.
Lintner, J.
(1965). The valuation of risk assets and the selection of risky investments in stock portfolios and capital budgets. Review of Economics and Statistics, 47, 13-37.
53.
McGuire, J. B.
, Sundgren, A.,& Schneeweis, T. (1988). Corporate social responsibility and firm financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 854-872. (H1, H2, H3, H6)
54.
McNamara, G.
, & Bromiley, P. (1999). Risk and return in organizational decision making. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 330-339.
55.
McWilliams, A.
, & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26, 117-127.
56.
Milgrom, P.
,& Roberts, J. (1992). Economics, organizations, and management. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
57.
Miller, K.
, & Bromiley, P. (1990). Strategic risk and corporate performance: An analysis of alternative risk measures. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 759-779.
58.
Modigliani, F.
,& Pogue, G. A. (1993). An introduction to risk and return: Concepts and evidence. In S. Levine (Ed.), Financial analysts’handbook(pp. 183-200). Homewood, IL: Dow Jones-Irwin.
59.
O’Neill, H. M.
, Saunders, O. B., & McCarthy, A. D. (1989). Board members, corporate social responsiveness and profitability: Are tradeoffs necessary?Journal of Business Ethics, 8, 353-357. (H1, H2, H6)
60.
Pava, M. L.
,& Krausz, J. (1995). Corporate responsibility and financial performance: The paradox of social cost. Westport, CT: Quorum. (H1, H2, H4, H6)
61.
Post, J. E.
(Ed.). (1991). Research in corporate social performance and policy: Vol. 12. Greenwich, CT: JAI.
62.
Preiss, R.
, & Allen, M. (1990, June). Precautions and prospects for using meta-analysis. Paper presented at the meeting of International Communication Association Convention, Dublin, Ireland.
63.
Roberts, J. A.
(1996). Will the socially responsible consumer please step forward?Business Horizons, 39(1), 79-83.
64.
Roberts, R. W.
(1992). Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: An application of stakeholder theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17, 595-612. (H1, H2, H5)
65.
Rudd, A.
(1981). Social responsibility and portfolio performance. California Management Review, 23(4), 55-62.
66.
Sauer, D. A.
(1997). The impact of social-responsibility screens on investment performance: Evidence from the Domini 400 Social Index and Domini Equity Mutual Fund. Review of Financial Economics, 6(2), 137-149.
67.
Sennett, F.
(1999, April). Coming clean on corrections. Editor & Publisher, 38-38.
68.
Sharfman, M.
(1996). A concurrent validity study of the KLD social performance ratings data. Journal of Business Ethics, 15(3), 287-296.
69.
Sharpe, W. F.
(1964). Capital asset prices: A theory of market equilibrium under conditions of risk. Journal of Finance, 19, 425-442.
70.
Sharpe, W. F.
(1990). Quantifying the market risk premium phenomenon for investment decision making. Charlottesville, VA: Institute for Chartered Financial Analysts.
71.
Shavelson, R. J.
, Webb, N. M., & Rowley, G. L. (1989). Generalizability theory. American Psychologist, 44, 922-932.
72.
Simerly, R. L.
(1995). Institutional ownership, corporate social performance, and firms’ financial performance. Psychological Reports, 77, 515-525. (H1, H2, H3, H5)
73.
Spicer, B. H.
(1978a). Investors, corporate social performance and information disclosure: An empirical study. Accounting Review, 53, 94-111. (H1, H2, H6)
74.
Spicer, B. H.
(1978b). Market risk, accounting data and companies’ pollution control records. Journal of Business, Finance, & Accounting, 5, 67-83. (H1, H2, H6)
75.
Starik, M. (1990). Stakeholder management and firm performance: Reputation and financial relationships to U.S. electric utility consumer-related strategies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, Athens. (H1, H2, H4, H6)
76.
Starik, M.
(1995). Should trees have managerial standing? Toward stakeholder status for non-human nature. Journal of Business Ethics, 14, 207-217.
77.
Starik, M.
, & Carroll, A. B. (1991). In search of beneficence: Reflections on the connection between firm social and financial performance. In K. Paul (Ed.), Contemporary issues in business and society in the United States and abroad(pp. 79-108). New York: Edwin Mellen.
78.
Tracz, S. (1985). The effect of the violation of the assumption of independence when combining correlation coefficients in a meta-analysis (Doctoral dissertation, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, 1985). Dissertation Abstracts International, 46, 688A.
79.
Traub, R. E.
(1994). Reliability for the social sciences: Theory and application: Vol. 3. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
80.
Trotman, K. T.
, & Bradley, G. W. (1981). Associations between social responsibility disclosure and characteristics of companies. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 6, 355-362. (H1, H2, H6)
81.
Tukey, J. W.
(1960). Asurvey of sampling from contaminated distributions. In I. Olkin, J. G. Ghurye, W. Hoffding, W. G. Madoo,& H. Mann (Eds.), Contributions to probability and statistics. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
82.
Tukey, J. W.
(1977). Exploratory data analysis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
83.
Turban, D. B.
, & Greening, D. W. (1997). Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 658-672.
84.
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.
85.
Waddock, S. A.
, & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance-financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 303-319. (H1, H2, H5)
86.
Waddock, S. A.
,& Mahon, J. F. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited: Dimensions of efficacy, effectiveness, and efficiency. In J. E. Post (Ed.), Research in corporate social performance and policy: Vol. 12(pp. 231-262). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
87.
Waddock, S. A.
,& Smith, N. (2000, Winter). Corporate responsibility audits: Doing well by doing good. Sloan Management Review, 41(2), 75-83.
88.
Wartick, S. L.
, & Cochran, P. L. (1985). The evolution of the corporate social performance model. Academy of Management Review, 10, 758-769.
89.
Webb, E. J.
, Campbell, D., Schwartz, R., Sechrest, L.,& Grove, J. (1981). Nonreactive measures in the social sciences. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
90.
Williamson, O. E.
(1975). Markets and hierarchies: Analysis and antitrust implications. New York: Free Press.
91.
Williamson, O. E.
(1985). The economic institutions of capitalism: Firms, markets, relational contracting. New York: Free Press.
92.
Willums, J.-O.
(1999, May 3). Social responsibility and shareholder value. Business Week (Asian Edition), 85-85.
93.
Wiseman, R.
, & Catanach, A. (1997). A longitudinal disaggregation of operational risk under changing regulations: Evidence from the savings and loan industry. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 799-830.
94.
Wood, D. J.
(1991a). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16, 691-718.
95.
Wood, D. J.
(1991b). Social issues in management: Theory and research in corporate social performance. Journal of Management, 17, 383-406.
96.
Wood, D. J.
(1995). The Fortunedatabase as a CSP measure. Business & Society, 34, 197-198.
97.
Wood, D. J.
, & Jones, R. E. (1995. Stakeholder mismatching: A theoretical problem in empirical research on corporate social performance. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 3, 229-267.
