Based on new survey evidence, this article analyzes the allocation of departmental responsibility for the management of corporate charitable giving within a sample of large U.K. companies. Several qualitatively different forms of management are identified, and a model of the determinants of the choice among these forms is estimated. The findings indicate that the allocation of internal responsibility for the management of corporate giving is significantly influenced by the extent and type of managerially perceived stakeholder pressures, organizational size, and industry characteristics. The evidence indicates that, given the firm is sufficiently large to delegate the management of its charitable contributions, the choice over the location of control is largely a function of the nature of the prevailing forms of stakeholder pressure experienced by the organization.
Adams, M., & Hardwick, P. (1998). An analysis of corporate donations: United Kingdom evidence. Journal of Management Studies, 35(5), 641-654.
2.
Andrews, P. A. (1987). Evaluating the public affairs function. Paper presented at the Third Annual Issues Management Conference, Pennsylvania State University, University Park.
3.
Aoki, M. (1986). Horizontal vs. vertical information structure of the firm. American Economic Review, 76, 971-983.
4.
Arulampalam, W., & Stoneman, P. (1995). An investigation into the givings by large corporate donors to UK charities, 1979-86. Applied Economics, 27, 935-945.
5.
Berman, S. L., Wicks, A. C., Kotha, S., & Jones, T. M. (1999). Does stakeholder orientation matter? The relationship between stakeholder management models and firm financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42(5), 488-506.
6.
Bhambri, A., & Sonnenfeld, J. (1988). Organization structure and corporate social performance: A field study in two contrasting industries. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 642-662.
7.
Black, L. D., & Hartel, C. E. J. (2002). The relationship between corporate social responsibility and public relations: Evidence from a scale development study. In D. Windsor & S. A. Welcomer (Eds.), Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Meeting of the International Association for Business and Society (pp. 100-104). International Association for Business and Society.
8.
Bourgeois, L. J. (1981). On the measurement of organizational slack. Academy of Management Review, 6(1), 29-39.
9.
Burris, V. (2001). The two faces of capital: Corporations and individual capitalists as political actors. American Sociological Review, 66, 361-381.
10.
Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 4, 497-505.
11.
Caves, R. E. (1980). Industrial organization, corporate strategy and structure. Journal of Economic Literature, 18, 64-92.
12.
Chandler, A. D., Jr., McCraw, T. K., & Tedlow, R. S. (1996). Management past and present. Cincinnati, OH: South-Western College Publishing.
13.
Chase, H. W. (1977). Public issues management: The new science. Public Relations Journal, 33(5), 25-26.
14.
Chase, H. W. (1984). Issues management: Origins of the future. Stamford, CT: Issues Action Publications.
15.
Columbo, M. G., & Delmastro, M. (2002). The determinants of organizational change and structural inertia: Technological and organizational factors. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 11(4), 595-635.
16.
Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1963). The behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
17.
DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organization fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147-160.
18.
Donaldson, L. (2001). The contingency theory of organizations. London: Sage.
19.
Frooman, J. (1999). Stakeholder influence strategies. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 191-206.
20.
Greene, W. H. (1993). Econometric analysis. New York: Macmillan.
21.
Greening, D. W., & Gray, B. (1994). Testing a model of organizational response to social and political issues. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 467-498.
22.
Griffin, J. J., & Mahon, J. F. (1997). The corporate social performance and financial performance debate: Twenty-five years of incomparable research. Business & Society, 36, 5-31.
23.
Hansen, W. L., & Mitchell, N. J. (2000). Disaggregating and explaining corporate political activity: Domestic and foreign corporations in national politics. American Political Science Review, 94, 891-903.
24.
Hensher, D. (1986). Simultaneous estimation of hierarchical logit mode choice models (Working Paper 24). New South Wales, Australia: MacQuarie University, School of Economic and Financial Studies.
25.
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Accounting, 3, 305-360.
26.
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1995). Specific and general knowledge and organizational structure. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 8(2), 1-33.
27.
Jones, J. (1983). What are the issues?Business Quarterly, 22(3), 22-31.
28.
Jones, T. M. (1995). Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics. Academy of Management Review, 20(2), 404-437.
29.
Kapstein, E. B. (2001). The corporate ethics crusade. Foreign Affairs, 80(5), 105-119.
30.
Lawson, M. B. (2001). In praise of slack: Time is of the essence. Academy of Management Executive, 18(3), 125-135.
31.
Lenway, S. A., & Rehbein, K. (1991)., Leaders followers, and free riders: An empirical test of variation in corporate political involvement. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 893-905.
32.
Marengo, L., Dosi, G., Legrenzi, P., & Pasquali, C. (2000), The structure of problem-solving knowledge and the structure of organizations. Industrial and Corporate Change, 9(4), 757-788.
33.
McElroy, K. M., & Siegfried, J. J. (1985). The effect of firms size on corporate philanthropy. Quarterly Review of Economics and Business, 25(2), 18-26.
34.
McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2000). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: Correlation or misspecification?Strategic Management Journal, 21, 603-609.
35.
Meyer, J., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340-363.
36.
Milgrom, P., & Roberts, J. (1990). The economics of modern manufacturing. American Economic Review, 80, 511-528.
37.
Miller, C. C., Glick, W. H., Wang, Y., & Huber G. P. (1991). Understanding technology-structure relationships: Theory development and meta-analytics theory testing. Academy of Management Journal, 34(2), 370-400.
38.
Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and want really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853-886.
39.
Navarro, P. (1988). Why do corporations give to charity?Journal of Business, 61(1), 65-93.
40.
Norton, M. (2000). 25 years of company giving. In J. Smyth (Ed.), The guide to UK company giving (3rd ed., pp. 9-12). London: Directory of Social Change.
41.
Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 145-179.
42.
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations. New York: Harper & Row.
43.
Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2002). The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy. Harvard Business Review, 80(12), 56-68.
44.
Post, J. E., Murray, E. A., Dickie, R. B., & Mahon, J. F. (1982). The public affairs function in American corporations: Development and relations with corporate planning. Journal of Long Range Planning, 15(2), 12-21.
45.
Radner, R. (1992). Hierarchy: The economics of managing. Journal of Economic Literature, 30, 1382-1415.
46.
Roberts, R. W. (1992). Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: An application of stakeholder theory. Accounting, Organizations, and Society, 17(6), 595-612.
47.
Robertson, D. C., & Nicholson, N. (1996). Expressions of corporate social responsibility in UK firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 15, 1095-1106.
48.
Saiia, D. H. (2001, Summer). Philanthropy and corporate citizenship: Strategic philanthropy is good corporate citizenship. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, (2), 57-74.
49.
Schaefer, S. (1998). Influence costs, structural inertia, and organizational change. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 7, 237-263.
50.
Schmidt, P., & Strauss, R. (1975). The prediction of occupation using multiple logit models. International Economic Review, 16, 471-486.
51.
Siegfried, J. J., McElroy, K. M., & Bientot-Fawkes, D. (1983). The management of corporate contributions. Research in Corporate Performance and Policy, 5, 87-102.
52.
Smith, N. C. (1990). Morality and the market: Consumer pressure for corporate accountability. London: Routledge.
53.
Smyth, J. (Ed.). (2000). Guide to UK company giving (3rd ed.). London: Directory of Social Change.
54.
St. Clair, L., & Tschirhart, M. (2002, August). The influence of slack in human resources on corporate volunteer programs. Paper presented at the Academy of Management, Denver, CO.
55.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1125-1131.
56.
Wartick, S., & Rude, R. (1986). Issues management: Corporate fad or corporate function?California Management Review, 29(1), 124-140.
57.
Watts, R. I., & Zimmermann, J. L. (1978). Toward a positive theory of the determination of accounting standards. Accounting Review, 53(1), 112-134.
58.
Welcomer, S. A., Cochran, P. L., Rands, G., & Haggerty, M. (2003). Constructing a web: Effects of power and social responsiveness on firm-stakeholder relationships. Business & Society, 42(1), 43-82.
59.
Williamson, O. E. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism: Firms, markets, relational contracting. New York: Free Press.
60.
Wood, D. J. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16(4), 691-718.
