Scandals at Enron and WorldCom have thrust debates concerning
corporate governance and corporate social performance (CSP) to the forefront of
the minds of shareholders, managers, and public policy makers. Relying on the
theory of stakeholder salience, the authors suggest that institutional owners’
investment horizons, as well as the frequency and coordination of institutional
owners’ activism, moderate the institutional ownership -CSP relationship. Data
collected in 1995 and 2000 from the Fortune 500
firms show that long-term institutional ownership is positively associated with
CSP and that the frequency and coordination of activism interact with long-term
institutional holdings to positively affect CSP 3 years later.
Agle, B. R., Mitchell, R. K., & Sonnenfeld, J. A.1999. Who matters to CEOs? An investigation of
stakeholder attributes and salience, corporate performance, and CEO
values. Academy of Management Journal,
42: 507-525.
2.
Aupperle, K., Carroll, A., & Hatfield, J.1985. An empirical examination of the relationship
between corporate social responsibility and profitability.
Academy of Management Journal, 28:
446-463.
3.
Barney, J.1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive
advantage. Journal of Management,
17: 99-120.
4.
Berman, S. L., Wicks, A. C., Kotha, S., & Jones, T. M.1999. Does stakeholder orientation matter: The
relationship between stakeholder models and firm financial
performance. Academy of Management Journal,
42: 488-506.
5.
Birchard, B.1995. How many masters can you serve?CFO, 11:
48-53.
6.
Blair, M.1995. Ownership and control: Rethinking corporate governance for
the twenty-first century. Washington, DC:
Brookings Institution.
7.
Boyd, B. K., Dess, G. G., & Rasheed, A. M. A.1993. Divergence between archival and perceptual measures
of the environment: Causes and consequences. Academy of
Management Review, 18:
204-226.
8.
Bushee, B.2001. Do institutional investors prefer near-term
earnings over long-run value. Contemporary Accounting
Research, 18:
207-246.
9.
Chaganti, R., & Damanpour, F.1991. Institutional ownership, capital structure, and
firm performance. Strategic Management Journal,
12: 479-491.
10.
Clarkson, M.1995. A stakeholder framework for analyzing and
evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of
Management Review, 20:
92-117.
11.
Cochran, P. L., & Wood, R. A.1984. Corporate social responsibility and financial
performance. Academy of Management Journal,
27: 42-57.
12.
Coffey, B. S., & Fryxell, G. E.1991. Institutional ownership of stock and dimensions of
corporate social performance: An empirical examination.
Journal of Business Ethics, 10:
437-444.
13.
Cohen, J., & Cohen, P.1983. Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the
behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
14.
David, P., Hitt, M., & Gimeno, J.2001. The role of activism by institutional investors in
influencing R&D. Academy of Management
Journal, 44:
144-157.
15.
David, P., & Kochhar, R.1996. Barriers to effective governance by institutional
investors: Implications for theory and practice. European
Management Journal, 14:
457-466.
16.
Davis, G. F., & Thompson, T. A.1994. A social movement perspective on corporate
control. Administrative Science Quarterly,
29: 141-173.
17.
Edwards, F. R., & Hubbard, G.2000. The growth of institutional stock ownership: A
promise unfulfilled. Journal of Applied Corporate
Finance, 13:
92-104.
18.
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E.1984. Social cognition. Reading,
MA:
Addison-Wesley.
19.
Friedman, M.1970. The social responsibility of business is to
increase profits. New York Times Magazine,
September 13: 32.
20.
Gedajlovic, E., & Shapiro, D. M.2002. Ownership structure and firm profitability in
Japan. Academy of Management Journal,
45: 565-575.
21.
Gilson, R. J., & Kraakman, R.1991. Reinventing the outside director: An agenda for
institutional investors. Stanford Law Review,
43: 863-906.
22.
Graves, S. B., & Waddock, S. A.1994. Institutional owners and corporate social
performance. Academy of Management Journal,
37: 1034-1046.
23.
Grier, P., & Zychowicz, E. J.1994. Institutional investors, corporate discipline and
the role of debt. Journal of Economics and
Business, 46:
1-11.
24.
Hambrick, D. C.1981. Strategic awareness within top management
teams. Strategic Management Journal,
2: 263-279.
25.
Hansen, G. S., & Hill, C. W. L.1991. Are institutional investors myopic? A time-series
study of four technology-driven industries. Strategic
Management Journal, 12:
1-16.
26.
Harrison, J. S., & Freeman, R. E.1999. Stakeholder, social responsibility and performance:
Empirical evidence and theoretical perspectives. Academy
of Management Journal, 42:
479-485.
27.
Hillman, A. J., & Keim, G. D.2001. Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and
social issues: What’s the bottom line. Strategic
Management Journal, 22:
125-139.
28.
Hitt, M. A., & Ireland, R. D.1985. Corporate distinctive competence, strategy,
industry and performance. Strategic Management
Journal, 6:
273-293.
29.
Hoffman, A.1996. A strategic response to investor
activism. Sloan Management Review,
37(Winter):
51-64.
30.
Hoffman, R., & Gopinath, C.1994. The importance of international business to the
strategic agenda of U.S. CEOs. Journal of International
Business Studies, 25:
625-737.
31.
Hoskisson, R. E., Hitt, M. A., Johnson, R. A., & Grossman, W.2002. Conflicting voices: The effects of institutional
ownership heterogeneity and internal governance on corporate innovation
strategies. Academy of Management Journal,
45: 697-716.
32.
Hoskisson, R. E., Johnson, R. A., & Moesel, D. D.1994. Corporate divestiture intensity in restructuring
firms: Effects of governance, strategy, and performance.
Academy of Management Journal, 27:
1207-1251.
33.
Jacobs, M. T.1991. The causes and cures of our short-term myopia.
Boston: Harvard Business School
Press.
34.
Johnson, R. A., & Greening, D. W.1994. Relationships between corporate social performance,
financial performance, and firm governance. Academy of
Management Best Papers Proceedings, 53:
314-318.
35.
Johnson, R. A., & Greening, D. W.1999. The effects of corporate governance and
institutional ownership types on corporate social performance.
Academy of Management Journal, 42:
564-576.
36.
Jones, T.1995. Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of
ethics and economics. Academy of Management
Review, 20:
404-437.
37.
Kassinis, G., & Vafeas, N.2002. Corporate boards and outside stakeholders as
determinants of environmental litigation. Strategic
Management Journal, 23:
399-415.
38.
Khorana, A.1996. Top management turnover: An investigation of mutual
fund managers. Journal of Financial Economics,
40: 403-427.
39.
Kochhar, R., & David, P.1996. Institutional investors and firm innovation: A test
of competing hypotheses. Strategic Management
Journal, 17:
73-84.
40.
Legnick-Hall, C. A.1996. Customer contributions to quality: A different view
of the customer-oriented firm. Academy of Management
Review, 21:
791-824.
41.
Mahapatra, S.1984. Investor reaction to corporate social
accounting. Journal of Business Financial and
Accounting, 11:
29-40.
42.
McGuire, J., Dow, S., & Archgeyd, K.2003. CEO incentives and corporate social
performance. Journal of Business Ethics,
45(4):
341-363.
43.
Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J.1997. Towards a theory of stakeholder identification and
salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts.
Academy of Management Review, 22:
853-866.
44.
Monks, R. A. G., & Minow, N.1991. Power and accountability. New
York:
HarperCollins.
45.
Neter, J., Wasserman, W., & Kutner, M. H.1989. Applied linear regression models.
Homewood, IL:
Irwin.
46.
Opler, T. C., & Sokobin, J.1997. Does coordinated institutional shareholder activism
work? Working paper, Ohio State
University, Columbus,
OH.
47.
Pearce, J. A., & Zahra, S. A.1991. The relative power of CEOs and boards of
directors. Strategic Management Journal,
12: 135-153.
48.
Pfeffer, J.1981. Power in organizations. New
York: Harper
Business.
49.
Porter, M. E.1992. Capital disadvantage: America’s failing capital
investment system. Harvard Business Review,
70: 65-82.
50.
Pound, J.1992. Beyond takeovers: Politics comes to corporate
control. Harvard Business Review,
70: 83.
51.
Preston, L. E., & Post, J. E.1975. Private management and public policy: The principle of
public responsibility. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice
Hall.
52.
Roe, M. J.1994. Strong managers, weak owners: The political roots of
American corporate finance. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
53.
Ruf, B. M., Muralidhar, K., & Paul, K.1993. Eight dimensions of corporate social performance:
Determination of relative importance using the analytic hierarchy
process. Academy of Management Best Paper
Proceedings, 52:
326-330.
54.
Schwab, S. J., & Thomas, R. S.1998. Realigning corporate governance: Shareholder
activism by labor unions. Michigan Law Review,
96: 1018-1094.
55.
Shortell, S. M., & Zajac, E. J.1990. Perceptual and archival measures of Miles and
Snow’strategic types: A comprehensive assessment of reliability and
validity. Academy of Management Journal,
33(4):
817-835.
56.
Simerly, R., & Li, M.2000. Corporate social performance and multinationality: A
longitudinal study. Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/%7Ebquest/2000/corporate.html
57.
Smith, M. P.1996. Shareholder activism by institutional investors:
Evidence from CALPERS. Journal of Finance,
51: 227-252.
58.
Starks, L. T.1987. Performance incentives fees: An agency theoretic
approach. Journal of Financial and Quantitative
Analysis, 22:
33-50.
59.
Turban, D. B., & Greening, D. W.1997. Corporate social performance and organizational
attractiveness to prospective employees. Academy of
Management Journal, 40:
658-672.
60.
Useem, M.1993. Executive defense: Shareholder power and corporate
reorganization. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
61.
Useem, M.1996. Investor capitalism: How money managers are changing the
face of corporate America. New York:
Basic Books.
62.
Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B.1997. The corporate social performance-financial
performance link. Strategic Management Journal,
18: 303-319.
63.
Wahal, S.1996. Pension fund activism and firm
performance. Journal of Financial and Quantitative
Analysis, 31:
1-23.
64.
Wood, D.1991. Corporate social responsibility
revisited. Academy of Management Review,
16, 691-718.
65.
Wright, P., Ferris, S., Sarin, A., & Awasthi, V.1996. Impact of corporate insider, blockholder, and
institutional equity ownership on firm risk taking.
Academy of Management Journal, 39:
441-463.
66.
Wright, P., Kroll, M., & Elenkov, D.2002. Acquisition returns, increase in firm size, and
chief executive officer compensation: The moderating role of
monitoring. Academy of Management Journal,
45: 599-608.
67.
Zahra, S. A.1996. Governance, ownership, and corporate
entrepreneurship: The moderating impact of industry technological
opportunities. Academy of Management Journal,
39: 1713-1735.
68.
Zahra, S. A., Neubaum, D. O., & Huse, M.2000. Entrepreneurship in medium-size companies:
Exploring the effects of ownership and governance systems.
Journal of Management, 26:
947-976.
