This article presents an integrative conceptual framework for linking corporate social performance, stakeholders, and quality of management, then tests this framework empirically. Results provide strong support for the hypothesis that perceived quality of management can be explained by the quality of performance with respect to specific primary stakeholders: owners, employees, customers, and (marginally) communities, but treatment of ecological environmental considera- tions is not a significant factor.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alexander, G.
, and Rogene Buchholz. 1982. "Corporate Social Responsibility and Stock Market Performance."Academy of Management Journal21: 479-486.
2.
Aupperle, Kenneth E.1991. "The Use of Forced Choice Survey Procedures in Assessing Corporate Social Orientation."Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy12: 269-280.
3.
Aupperle, Kenneth E.
, Archie B. Carroll, andJ. D. Hatfield. 1985. "An Empirical Examination of the Relationship Between Corporate Social Responsibility and Profitability."Academy of Management Journal28 (2): 446-463.
4.
Baldridge Awards
. 1996. Malcom Baldridge National Quality Award, 1996 Award, 1996 Award Criteria. National Institutes of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD.
5.
Brenner, Steven
, and Philip Cochran. 1991. "A Stakeholder Theory of the Fimi." Paper presented at the meeting of the International Association of Business and Society, Sundance, UT, March.
6.
Carroll, Archie B.1979. "A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Social Perfornance."Academy of Management Review4: 497-505.
7.
Carroll, Archie B.1993. Business and Society: Ethics and StakeholderManagement. 2ded.Cincinnati, OH: South-Western.
8.
Carroll, Archie B.1995. "Stakeholder Thinking in Three Models of Management Morality: APerspective With Strategic Implications." Pp. 47-74 in Juha Naisi (ed.), Understanding Stakeholder Thinking. Helsinki, Fmland: LSR Publications.
Clarkson, Max B. E.1995. "A Stakeholder Framework for Analyzing and Evaluating Corporate Social Performance."Academy of Management Review20: 92-117.
11.
Cochran, Philip L.
, and Robert A. Wood. 1984. 'Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance."Academy of Management Journal27:42-56.
12.
Coffey, Betty S.
, and Gerald E. Fryxell. 1991. "Instituiional Ownership of Stock and Dimensions of Corporate Social Performance: An Empirical Examination."Journal of Business Ethics10: 437-444.
13.
Donaldson, Thomas
, and Lee E. Preston. 1995. "The StakeholderTheory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications." Academyof Management Review (20 January): 65-91.
14.
Epstein, Edwin M.1987. "The Corporate Social Policy Process: Beyond Business Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility, and Corporate Social Responsiveness."California Management Review29 (3): 29-114.
15.
Evan, William M.
, and R. Edward Freeman. 1988. "A Stakeholder Theory of the Modern Corporation: Kantian Capitalism." In T. Beauchamp and N. Bowie (eds.), Ethical Theory and Business. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
16.
Frederick, William C.1987. "Theories of Corporate Social Performance." Pp. 142-161 in S. P. Sethi and C. M. Falbe (eds.), Business and Society. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
17.
Frederick, William C.1995. Values, Nature, and Culture in theAmerican Corporation. New York: Oxford University Press.
18.
Freeman, R. Edward
. 1984. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. New York: Basic Books.
19.
Gephart, R. P., Jr.1991. "Multiple Methods for Tracking Corporate Social Performance: Insights From a Study of Major Industrial Accidents."Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy12: 359-385.
Graves, Samuel B.
, and Sandra A. Waddock. 1994. "Institutional Owners and Corporate Social Performance."Academy of Management Journal37 (5): 103-446.
22.
Jones, Thomas M.1995a. "Instrumental Stakeholder Theory: A Synthesis of Ethics and Economics."Academy of Management Review20: 404-437.
23.
Jones, Thomas M.1995b. "Instrumental Stakeholder Theory and Paradigm Consensus in Business and Society: Advances on the Methodological Front." Pp. 637-641 in Denis Collins (ed.), Proceedings of the International Association of Business and Society. Vienna, Austria: IABS.
24.
Kinder, Lydenberg, Domini & Co.1994-1995. KLD Company Reviews, Social Screens, Analysis Year 1994-1995. Cambridge, MA: KLD.
25.
Koch, James V.
, and Richard J. Cebula. 1994. "In Search of Excellent Management."Journal of Management Studies31 (5): 681-699.
26.
McGuire, Jean B.
, A. Sundgren, and T. Schneeweis. 1988. "Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Financial Performance."Academy of Management Journal31 (4): 854-872.
27.
Miles, Robert H.1987. Managing the Corporate Social Environment: A Grounded Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
28.
Post, James E.
, William C. Frederick, Anne T. Lawrence, and James Weber. 1996. Business and Society: Corporate Strategy, Public Policy, Ethics. New York: McGraw-Hill.
29.
Preston, Lee E.
, and James E. Post. 1975. Private Management and Public Policy: The Principle of Public Responsibility. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
30.
Ruf, B.
, K. Muralidhar, and K. Paul. 1993. "Eight Dimensions of Corporate Social Performance: Determination of Relative Importance Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process." Pp. 326-330 in Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings.
31.
Shane, P. B.
, and B. H. Spicer. 1983. "Market Response to Environmental Information Produced Outside the Firm."The Accounting Review (July): 521-536.
32.
Starik, Mark
. 1995. "Should Trees Have Managerial Standing? Toward Stakeholder Status for Non-Human Nature."Journal of Business Ethics14:204-217.
33.
Swanson, Diane L.1995. "Addressing a Theoretical Problem by Reorienting the Corporate Social Performance Model."Academy of Management Review20: 43-64.
34.
Ullmann, Ariah
. 1985. "Data in Search of a Theory: A Critical Examination of the Relationships Among Social Performance, Social Disclosure, and Economic Performance of U.S. Firms."Academy of Management Review10 (3): 540-577.
35.
Varadarajan, P. Rajan
, and Vasudevan Ramanujam. 1990. "The Corporate Performance Conundrum: A Synthesis of Contemporary Views and an Extension."Journal of Management Studies27 (5): 463-483.
36.
Waddock, Sandra A.1996. "Strategy, Structure, and Social Performance: Implications of the W-Form Enterprise."Business and the Contemporary World8 (1): 43-52.
37.
Waddock, Sandra A.
, and Samuel B. Graves. 1997. "The Corporate Social Performance-Financial Performance Link."Strategic Management Journal18 (4): 303-319.
38.
Waddock, Sandra A.1994. "Industry Performance and Investment in R&D and Capital Goods."The Journal of High Technology Management Research5 (1): 1-18.
39.
Wokutch, Richard E.
, and B. A. Spencer. 1987. "Corporate Saints and Sinners: The Effects of Philanthropic and Illegal Activity on Organizational Performance."California Management Review29: 77-88.
40.
Wolfe, R.
, and K. Kenneth Aupperle. 1991. "Introduction to Corporate Social Performance: Methods for Evaluating an Elusive Construct."Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy12: 265-268.
41.
Wood, Donna J.1991a. "Corporate Social Performance Revisited."Academy of Management Review16: 691-718.
42.
Wood, Donna J.1991b. "Social Issues in Management: Theory and Research in Corporate Social Performance."Journal of Management17 (2): 383-406.
43.
Wood, Donna J.
, and Raymond E. Jones. 1995. "Stakeholder Mismatching: A Theoretical Problem in Empirical Research on Corporate Social Performance."The International Journal of Organizational Analysis3 (3): 229-267.
