Backhaus, K.B., Stone, B.A., & Heiner, K. ( 2002). Exploring the relationship between corporate social performance and employer attractiveness. Business & Society, 41, 292-318.
2.
Cassill, D.L., & Hill, R.P. ( 2007). A naturological approach to corporate governance: An extension of the Frederick model of corporation-community relationships. Business & Society, 46, 286-303.
3.
Fort, T.L. ( 1999). Business and naturalism: A peek at transcendence? Business & Society, 38, 226-236.
4.
Frederick, W.C. ( 1995). Values, nature, and culture in the American corporation . New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
5.
Frederick, W.C. ( 1998). Creatures, corporations, communities, chaos, complexity: A naturological view of the corporate social role. Business & Society, 37, 358-389.
6.
Greening, D.W., & Turban, D.B. ( 2000). Corporate social performance as a competitive advantage in attracting a quality workforce. Business & Society , 39, 254-280.
7.
Griffin, J.J., & Mahon, J.F. ( 1997). The corporate social performance and corporate financial performance debate. Business & Society, 36, 5-31.
8.
Peterson, D.K. ( 2004). The relationship between perceptions of corporate citizenship and organizational commitment. Business & Society, 43, 296-319.
9.
Roman, R., Hayibor, S., & Agle, B.R. ( 1999). The relationship between social and financial performance . Business & Society, 38, 109-125.
10.
Waddock, S.A., & Graves, S.B. ( 1997). Quality of management and quality of stake-holder relations: Are they synonymous? Business & Society, 36, 250-279.
