Does firm size confound the relationship between corporate social performance and firm financial performance?

Journal of Business Ethics

Volumn 33, Issue 2, 2001, Pages 167-180

  Orlitzky, Marc ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^b Australian Graduate School of Management   (Australia)

Author keywords

Confounding variable; Corporate social performance; Firm financial performance; Firm size; Measurement error; Meta analysis; Path analysis; Reliability coefficient; Sampling error; Study artifacts

Indexed keywords

EID: 0035656514     PISSN: 01674544     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1017516826427     Document Type: Article

References (101)

1. Abbott, W. F. and J. R. Monsen: 1979, 'On the Measurement of Corporate Social Responsibility: Self-reported Disclosure as a Method of Measuring Corporate Social Involvement', Academy of Management Journal 22, 501-515.
2. Aldrich, H. E. and J. Pfeffer: 1976, 'Environments of Rrganizations', in A. Inkeles (ed.), Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 2 (Annual Reviews, Palo Alto, CA), pp. 79-105.
3. * Alexander, G. J. and R. A. Buchholz: 1978, 'Corporate Social Performance and Stock Market Performance', Academy of Management Journal 21, 479-486.
4. * Anderson, J. C. and A. W. Frankle: 1980, 'Voluntary Social Reporting: An Iso-beta Portfolio Analysis', Accounting Review 55, 467-479.
5. Aupperle, K. E., A. B. Carroll and J. D. Hatfield: 1985, 'An Empirical Investigation of the Relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility and Profitability', Academy of Management Journal 28, 446-463.
6. Aupperle, K. E., F. B. Simmons and W. Acar: 1990, August, An Empirical Investigation into How Entrepreneurs View Their Social Responsibilities. Paper presented at the Academy of Management meetings, San Francisco, CA.
7. * Belkaoui, A.: 1976, 'The Impact of the Disclosure of the Environmental Effects of Organizational Behavior on the Market', Financial Management 5, 26-31.
8. * Blackburn, V. L., M. Doran and C. B. Shrader: 1994, 'Investigating the Dimensions of Social Responsibility and the Consequences for Corporate Financial Performance', Journal of Managerial Issues 6(2), 195-212.
9. * Bowman, E. H.: 1976, 'Strategy and the Weather', Sloan Management Review 17, 49-58.
10. * Bowman, E. H.: 1978, 'Strategy, Annual Reports, and Alchemy', California Management Review 20, 64-71.
11. * Bowman, E. H. and M. Haire: 1975, 'A Strategic Posture Toward Corporate Social Responsibility', California Management Review 18, 49-58.
12. * Bragdon, J. H., Jr. and J. A. T. Marlin: 1972, 'Is Pollution Profitable?' Risk Management 19, 9-18.
13. * Brown, B. and S. Perry: 1994, 'Removing the Financial Performance Halo from Fortune's "Most Admired Companies"', Academy of Management Journal 37, 1346-1359.
14. Burke, L., J. M. Logsdon, W. Mitchell, M. Reiner and D. Vogel: 1986, 'Corporate Community Involvement in the San Francisco Bay Area', California Management Review 28(3), 122-141.
15. Capon, N., J. U. Parley and S. Hoenig: Oct. 1990, 'Determinants of Financial Performance: A Meta- Analysis', Management Science 36, 1143-1159.
16. Carroll, A. B.: 1979, 'A Three-dimensional Model of Corporate Performance', Academy of Management Review 4, 497-505.
17. * Chen, K. H. and R. W. Metcalf: 1980, 'The Relationship between Pollution Control Record and Financial Indicators Revisited', Accounting Review 55(1), 168-177.
18. Clarkson, M. B. E.: 1995, 'A Stakeholder Framework for Analyzing and Evaluating Corporate Social Performance', Academy of Management Review 20, 92-117.
19. * Cochran, P. L. and R. A. Wood: 1984, 'Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance', Academy of Management Journal 27, 42-56.
20. * Conine, T. E. and G. P. Madden: 1987, 'Corporate Social Responsibility and Investment Value: The Expectarional Relationship', in W. D. Guth (ed.), Handbook of Business Strategy 1986/1987 Yearbook (Warren, Gorham, & Lamont, Boston), pp. 18-1 to 18-9.
21. Cook, T. D. and D. T. Campbell: 1979, Quasi- Experimentation: Design & Analysis Issues for Field Settings (Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA).
22. Cooper, H. M.: 1989, Integrating Research: A Guide for Literature Reviews, 2nd ed. (Sage, Newbury Park, CA).
23. * Cowen, S. S., L. B. Ferreri and L. D. Parker: 1987, 'The Impact of Corporate Characteristics on Social Responsibility Disclosure: A Typology and Frequency-based Analysis. Accounting', Organizations and Society 12(2), 111-122.
24. Cronbach, L. J., G. C. Gleser and N. Rajaratnam: 1963, 'Theory of Generalizabilicy: A Liberalization of Reliability Theory', British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 16, 137-173.
25. Datta, D. and V. K. Narayanan: 1989, 'A Meta- analytic Review of the Concentration-performance Relationship: Aggregating Findings in Strategic Management', Journal of Management 15(3), 469- 483.
26. * Davidson, W. N. III and D. L. Worrell: 1992, 'Research Notes and Communications: The Effect of Product Recall Announcements on Shareholder Wealth', Strategic Management Journal 13, 467-473.
27. Donaldson, T. and L. E. Preston: 1995, 'The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications', Academy of Management Review 20, 65-91.
28. * Dooley, R. S. and L. D. Lerner: 1994, 'Pollution, Profits, and Stakeholders: The Constraining Effect of Economic Performance on CEO Concern With Stakeholder Expectations', Journal of Business Ethics 13, 701-711.
29. * Fogler, H. R. and F. Nutt: 1975, 'A Note on Social Responsibility and Stock Valuation', Academy of Management Journal 18, 155-160.
30. * Fombrun, C. and M. Shanley: 1990, 'What's in a Name? Reputation Building and Corporate Strategy', Academy of Management Journal 33, 233-258.
31. * Freedman, M. and B. Jaggi: 1982, 'Pollution Disclosures, Pollution Performance and Economic Performance', Omega: The International Journal of Management Science 10, 167-176.
32. * Freedman, M. and B. Jaggi: 1986, 'An Analysis of the Impact of Corporate Pollution Disclosures Included in Annual Financial Statements on Investors' Decisions', Advances in Public Interest Accounting 1, 192-212.
33. Freeman, R. E.: 1984, Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach (Pitman, Marshfield, MA).
34. Freeman, R. E. and W. M. Evan: 1990, 'Corporate Governance: A Stakeholder Interpretation', Journal of Behavioral Economics 19(4), 337-359.
35. Gooding, R. Z. and J. A. Wagner, III: 1985, 'A Meta- analytic Review of the Relationship between Size and Performance: The Productivity and Efficiency of Organizations and their Subunits', Administrative Science Quarterly 30, 462-481.
36. * Goodstein, J. D: 1992, 'Small Business and Corporate Social Performance: An Empirical Exploration of Small Business Involvement in Employer Supported Child Care', in J. E. Post (ed.), Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy: Markets, Politics, and Social Performance, vol. 13 (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), pp. 141-158.
37. * Graves, S. B. and S. A. Waddock: 1994, 'Institutional Owners and Corporate Social Performance', Academy of Management Journal 37, 1034-1046.
38. * Greening, D. W.: 1995, 'Conservation Strategies, Firm Performance, and Corporate Reputation in the U.S. Electric Utility Industry', Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy, Supplement 1 (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), pp. 345-368.
39. * Griffin, J. J. and J. F. Mahon: 1997, 'The Corporate Social Performance and Corporate Financial Performance Debate: Twenty-five Years of Incomparable Research', Business & Society 36, 5-31.
40. * Hansen, G. S. and B. Wernerfelt: 1989, 'Determinants of Firm Performance: The Relative Importance of Economic and Organizational Factors', Strategic Management Journal 10, 399-411.
41. * Heinze, D. C.: 1976, 'Financial Correlates of a Social Involvement Measure', Akron Business and Economic Review 7, 48-51.
42. * Herremans, I. M., P. Akathaporn and M. McInnes: 1993, 'An Investigation of Corporate Social Responsibility Reputation and Economic Performance', Accounting, Organizations and Society 18, 587-604.
43. Hill, C. W. L. and T. M. Jones: 1992, 'Stakeholder- agency Theory', Journal of Management Studies 29, 131-154.
44. Hunter, J. E. and F. L. Schmidt: 1990, Methods of Meta-analysis: Correcting Errors and Bias in Research Findings (Sage, Newbury Park, CA).
45. Ingram, R. W.: 1978, 'An Investigation of the Information Content of (Certain) Social Responsibility Disclosures', Journal of Accounting Research 16, 270-285.
46. Ingram, R. W. and K. B. Frazier: 1980, 'Environmental Performance and Corporate Disclosure', Journal of Accounting Research 18, 614-622.
47. Jacobson, R.: 1987, 'The Validity of ROI as a Measure of Business Performance', American Economic Review 77, 470-478
48. Jones, T. M.: 1995, 'Instrumental Stakeholder Theory: A Synthesis of Ethics and Economics', Academy of Management Review 20, 404-437.
49. Kayande, U. and M. Bhargava: 1994, 'An Examination of Temporal Patterns in Meta- analysis', Marketing Letters 5(2), 141-151.
50. * Kedia, B. L. and E. C. Kuntz: 1981, The Context of Social Performance: An Empirical Study of Texas Banks', in L. E. Preston (ed.), Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy, vol. 3 (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), pp. 133-154.
51. Kimberly, J. R.: 1976, 'Organizational Size and the Structuralist Perspective: A Review, Critique, and Proposal', Administrative Science Quarterly 21, 571-597.
52. * Levy, F. K. and G. M. Shatto: 1980, 'Social Responsibility in Large Electric Utility Firms: The Case for Philanthropy', in L. E. Preston (ed.), Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy, vol. 2 (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), pp. 237-249.
53. * Long, W. F. and D. J. Ravenscraft: 1984, 'The Misuse of Accounting Rates of Return: Comment', American Economic Review 74, 494-501.
54. * Marcus, A. A. and R. S. Goodman: 1986, 'Compliance and Performance: Toward a Contingency Theory', in L. E. Preston (ed.), Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy, vol. 8 (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), pp. 193- 221.
55. * McGuire, J. B., A. Sundgren and T. Schneeweis: 1988, 'Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Financial Performance', Academy of Management Journal 31, 854-872.
56. Mueller, H.: 1969, The Policy of the European Coal and Steel Community Toward Mergers and Agreements by Steel Companies', Antitrust Bulletin 14 (Summer), 413-448.
57. * Newgren, K. E., A. A. Rasher, M. E. LaRoe and M. R. Szabo: 1985, 'Environmental Assessment and Corporate Performance: A Longitudinal Analysis Using a Market-determined Performance Measure', in Lee E. Preston (ed.), Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy, vol. 7 (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), pp. 153-164.
58. O'Neill, H. M., C. B. Saunders and A. D. McCarthy: 1989, 'Board Members, Corporate Social Responsiveness and Profitability: Are Tradeoffs Necessary?' Journal of Business Ethics 8, 353-357.
59. Orlitzky, M.: 1998, A Meta-analysis of the Relationship between Corporate Social Performance and Firm Financial Performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; UMI no. AAT 9904332; DAI-A 59/09, p. 3527, March 1999.
60. * Patten, D. M.: 1990, 'The Market Reaction to Social Responsibility Disclosures: The Case of the Sullivan Principles Signings', Accounting, Organizations and Society 15, 575-587.
61. * Pava, M. L. and J. Krausz: 1995, Corporate Responsibility and Financial Performance: The Paradox of Social Cost (Quorum, Westport, CT).
62. Pfeffer, J. and G. R. Salancik: 1978, The External Control of Organizations (Harper & Row, New York).
63. * Pinkston, T. S. and A. B. Carroll: 1993, 'An Investigation of the Relationship between Organizational Size and Corporate Social Performance', MBS Proceedings, 109-114.
64. * Preston, L. E.: 1978, 'Analyzing Corporate Social Performance: Methods and Results', Journal of Contemporary Business 7, 135-150.
65. Price, J. L. and C. W. Mueller: 1986, Handbook of Organizational Measurement, 2nd ed. (Pitman, Marshfield, MA).
66. * Reimann, B. C.: 1975, 'Organizational Effectiveness and Management's Public Values: A Canonical Analysis', Academy of Management Journal 18, 224-241.
67. * Riahi-Belkaoui, A.: 1991, 'Organizational Effectiveness, Social Performance and Economic Performance', in J. E. Post (ed.), Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy, vol. 12 (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), pp. 143-153.
68. * Roberts, R. W.: 1992, 'Determinants of Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure: An Application of Stakeholder Theory', Accounting, Organizations and Society 17(6), 595-612.
69. * Russo, M. V. and P. A. Fouts: 1997, 'A Resource- based Perspective on Corporate Environmental Performance and Profitability', Academy of Management Journal 40, 534-559.
70. Schmidt, F. L., K. Law, J. E. Hunter and H. R. Rothstein: 1993, 'Refinements in Validity Generalization Methods: Implications for the Situational Specificity Hypothesis', Journal of Applied Psychology 78, 3-12.
71. * Shane, P. B. and B. H. Spicer: 1983, 'Market Response to Environmental Information Produced Outside the Firm', Accounting Review, 58, 521-538.
72. Sharfman, M.: 1996, 'A Concurrent Validity Study of the KLD Social Performance Ratings Data', Journal of Business Ethics 15, 287-296.
73. Stanford, R. E.: 1980, 'The Effects of Promotion by Seniority in Growth-constrained Organizations', Management Science 26, 680-693.
74. * Simerly, R. L.: 1994, 'Corporate Social Performance and Firms' Financial Performance: An Alternative Perspective', Psychological Reports 75, 1091-1103.
75. * Simerly, R. L.: 1995, 'Institutional Ownership, Corporate Social Performance, and Firms' Financial Performance', Psychological Reports 77, 515-525.
76. * Spencer, B. A. and S. G. Taylor: 1987, 'A Within and Between Analysis of the Relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance', Akron Business and Economic Review 18, 7-18.
77. * Spicer, B. H.: 1978, 'Investors, Corporate Social Performance and Information Disclosure: An Empirical Study', Accounting Review 53, 94-111.
78. Stanwick, P. A. and S. D. Stanwick.: 1998, 'The Relationship between Corporate Social Performance, and Organizational Size, Financial Performance, and Environmental Performance: An Empirical Examination', Journal of Business Ethics 17, 195-204.
79. * Starik, M.: 1990, Stakeholder Management and Firm Performance: Reputation and Financial Relationships to U.S. Electric Utility Consumer-related Strategies. University of Georgia, Athens. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
80. Starik, M.: 1995, 'Should Trees Have Managerial Standing? Toward Stakeholder Status for Non- human Nature', Journal of Business Ethics 14, 207-217.
81. Starik, M. and A. B. Carroll: 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 (Edwin Meilen Press, New York), pp. 79-108.
82. * Sturdivant, F. D. and J. L. Ginter: 1977, 'Corporate Social Responsiveness: Management Attitudes and Economic Performance', California Management Review 19, 30-39.
83. Thompson, J. D.: 1967, Organizations in Action (McGraw-Hill, New York).
84. Traub, R. E.: 1994, Reliability for the Social Sciences: Theory and Applications, Vol. 3 (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA).
85. * Trotman, K. T. and G. W. Bradley: 1981, 'Associations between Social Responsibility Disclosure and Characteristics of Companies', Accounting, Organizations and Society 6(4), 355-362.
86. * Turban, D. B. and D. W Greening.: 1997, 'Corporate Social Performance and Organizational Attractiveness to Prospective Employees', Academy of Management Review 40, 658-672.
87. 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.
88. * Useem, M.: 1991, 'Organizational and Managerial Factors in the Shaping of Corporate Social and Political Action', in J. E. Post (ed.), Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy, vol. 12 (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), pp. 63-92.
89. Vance, S.: 1975, 'Are Socially Responsible Firms Good Investment Risks?' Management Review 64, 18-24.
90. * Venkatraman, N. and V. Ramanujam: 1987, 'Measurement of Business Economic Performance: An Examination of Method Convergence', Journal of Management 13, 109-122.
91. * Waddock, S. A. and S. B. Graves: 1997, 'The Corporate Social Performance-financial Performance Link', Strategic Management Journal 18, 303-319.
92. * Wartick, S. L.: 1988, 'How Issues Management Contributes to Corporate Performance', Business Forum 13, 16-22.
93. Wartick, S. L. and P. L. Cochran: 1985, 'The Evolution of the Corporate Social Performance Model', Academy of Management Review 10, 758-769.
94. Webb, E. J., D. Campbell, R. Schwartz, L. Sechrest and J. Grove: 1981, Nonreactive Measures in the Social Sciences (Houghton Mifflin, Boston).
95. Williamson, O. E.: 1975, Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications (Free Press, New York).
96. * Wiseman, J.: 1982, 'An Evaluation of Environmental Disclosures Made in Corporate Annual Reports', Accounting, Organizations and Society 7, 53-63.
97. * Wokutch, R. E. and B. A. Spencer: 1987, 'Corporate Sinners and Saints: The Effects of Philanthropic and Illegal Activity on Organizational Performance', California Management Review 29, 62-77.
98. * Wolfe, R.: 1991, 'The Use of Content Analysis to Assess Corporate Social Responsibility', in James E. Post (ed.), Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy, vol. 12 (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), pp. 281-307.
99. Wood, D. J.: 1991, 'Corporate Social Performance Revisited', Academy of Management Review 16, 691-718.
100. Wood, D. J.: 1995, 'The Fortune Database as a CSP Measure', Business & Society 34, 197-198.
101. Wood, D. J. and R. E. Jones: 1995, 'Stakeholder Mismatching: A Theoretical Problem in Empirical Research on Corporate Social Performance', The International Journal of Organizational Analysis 3, 229-267.