Taking aim at business: What factors lead environmental non-governmental organizations to target particular firms?

Business and Society

Volumn 45, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 47-86

  Hendry, Jamie R ^a,b  

^a BUCKNELL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b International Association for Business and Society   (United States)

Author keywords

Corporate financial performance; Corporate social performance; Environmental performance; NGOs; Stakeholders

Indexed keywords

EID: 32944481052     PISSN: 00076503     EISSN: 14678594     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0007650305281849     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Agle, B. R., Mitchell, R. K., & Sonnenfeld, J. A. (1999). Whomatters to CEOs? An investigation of stakeholder attributes and salience, corporate performance, and CEO values. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 507-525.
2. Alexander, G. J., & Buchholz, R. A. (1978). Corporate social responsibility and stock market performance. Academy of Management Journal, 21 (3). 479-486.
3. Aupperle, K. E., Carroll, A. B., & Hatfield, J. D. (1985). An empirical examination of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 28 (2). 446-463.
4. 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, 488-506.
5. Bosso, C. J. (2000). Environmental groups and the new political landscape. In N. J. Vig & M. E. Kraft (Eds.), Environmental policy: New directions for the twenty-first century (4th ed., pp. 53-74). Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly.
6. Bromiley, P., & Marcus, A. (1989). The deterrent to Dubious corporate behavior: Profitability, probability, and safety recalls. Strategic Management Journal, 10, 233-250.
7. Christmann, P. (2000). Effects of "best practices" of environmental management on cost advantage: The role of complementary assets. Academy of Management Journal, 43 (4). 663-680.
8. Christmann, P., & Taylor, G. (2002). Globalization and the environment: Strategies for international voluntary environmental initiatives. Academy of Management Executive, 16 (3). 121-135.
9. Clair, J. A., Milliman, J., & Mitroff, I. I. (1995). Clash or cooperation? Understanding environmental organizations and their relationship to business. Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy, Suppl. 1, 163-193.
10. Coffey, B. S., & Fryxell, G. E. (1991). Institutional ownership of stock and dimensions of corporate social performance: Anempirical examination. Journal of Business Ethics, 10, 437-444.
11. Cohen, E. (1998). Ideology, interest group formation, and the new left. New York: Garland.
12. Collins, D. (1994). The Toronto conference: Reflections on stakeholder theory. Business& Society, 33, 82-131.
13. DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organization fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147-160.
14. Driscoll, C. (1996). Fostering constructive conflict management in a multistakeholder context: The case of the forest round table on sustainable development. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 7 (2). 156-172.
15. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14 (4). 532-550.
16. Evan, W. M., & Freeman, R. E. (1993). A stakeholder theory of the modern corporation: Kantian capitalism. In T. L. Beauchamp & N. E. Bowie, (Eds.), Ethical theory and business (pp. 97-106). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
17. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.
18. Freeman, R. E., & Evan, W. M. (1990). Corporate governance: Astakeholder interpretation. The Journal of Behavioral Economics, 19, 337-359.
19. Friedman, M. (1962). Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
20. Frooman, J. (1999). Stakeholder influence strategies. Academy of Management Review, 24 (2). 191-205.
21. Gormley, W. T., Jr. (1983). The politics of public utility regulation. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
22. Griffin, J. J., & Mahon, J. F. (1997). The coroporate social performance and corporate financial performance debate: Twenty-five years of incomparable research. Business and Society, 36, 5-31.
23. Harper, D. (1992). Small n's and community case studies. In C. C. Ragin & H. S. Becker (Eds.), What is a case? Exploring the foundations of social inquiry (pp. 139-158). New York: Cambridge University Press.
24. Hart, S. L. (1995). A natural-resource-based view of the firm. Academy of Management Review, 20 (4). 986-1014.
25. Johnson, R. A., & Greening, D. W. (1994). Relationships between corporate social performance, financial performance, and firm governance. 1994 Best Paper Proceedings of the Academy of Management, 314-318.
26. Jones, T. M. (1991). Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: An issuecontingent model. Academy of Management Review, 16, 366-395.
27. Jones, T. M. (1995). Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics. Academy of Management Review, 20, 404-437.
28. King, C. (1969). Studies in social movements. New York: Random House.
29. Lieberson, S. (1992). Small n's and big conclusions: An examination of the reasoning in comparative studies based on a small number of cases. In C. C. Ragin & H. S. Becker (Eds.), What is a case? Exploring the foundations of social inquiry (pp. 105-118). New York: Cambridge University Press.
30. Miles, M., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
31. Mitchell, R., Agle, B., & Wood, D. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22, 853-886.
32. Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24, 403-441.
33. Pasquero, J. (1991). Supraorganizational collaboration: The Canadian environmental experiment. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 7, 38-64.
34. Pellow, D. (1999). Negotiation and confrontation: Environmental policymaking through consensus. Society & Natural Resources, 12, 189-203.
35. Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive strategy. New York: Free Press.
36. Powell, W., & DiMaggio, P. (1991). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
37. Rosenbaum, W. A. (1998). Environmental politics and policy (4th ed.) Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly.
38. Rowley, T. (1997). Moving beyond dyadic ties: A network theory of stakeholder influences. Academy of Management Review, 22, 887-910.
39. Rowley, T., & Berman, S. (2000). A brand new brand of corporate social performance. Business & Society, 39 (4). 397-418.
40. Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (1998). Corporate strategies and environmental regulations: An organizing framework. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 363-375.
41. Russo, M. V., & Fouts, P. A. (1997). A resource-based perspective on corporate environmental performance and profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 534-559.
42. Stanwick, P. A., & Stanwick, S. D. (1998). The relationship between corporate social performance and organizational size, financial performance, and environmental performance: An empirical examination. Journal of Business Ethics, 17 (2). 195-204.
43. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
44. Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20, 571-610.
45. Turcotte, M. (1995). Conflict and collaboration: The interfaces between environmental organizations and business firms. Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy, Suppl. 1, 195-229.
46. Turner, R. H., & Killian, L. M. (1972). Collective behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
47. Vaughn, D. (1992). Theory elaboration: The heuristics of case analysis. In C. C. Ragin & H. S. Becker (Eds.), What is a case? Exploring the foundations of social inquiry (pp. 173-202). New York: Cambridge University Press.
48. Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance-financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18 (4). 303-319.
49. Walton, J. (1992). Making the theoretical case. In C. C. Ragin & H. S. Becker (Eds.), What is a case? Exploring the foundations of social inquiry (pp. 121-138). NewYork: Cambridge University Press.
50. Wartick, S. (1994) The Toronto conference: Reflections on stakeholder theory. Business& Society, 33, 110-117.
51. Wokutch, R. E., & Spencer, B. A. (1987). Corporate saints and sinners: The effects of philanthropic and illegal activity on organizational performance. California Management Review, 29 (2). 62-77.
52. Wood, D. J., & Jones, R. E. (1995). Stakeholder mismatching: A theoretical problem in empirical research on corporate social performance. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 3, 229-267.
53. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). ThousandOaks, CA: Sage.
54. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). ThousandOaks, CA: Sage.