Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility (CSR): The moderating roles of attainment discrepancy and organization slack

Corporate Governance: An International Review

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 136-152

  Arora, Punit ^a   Dharwadkar, Ravi ^a  

^a SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Attainment Discrepancy; Behavioral Theory of the Firm (BTOF); Corporate Governance; Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR); Organizational Slack

Indexed keywords

EID: 79952188740     PISSN: 09648410     EISSN: 14678683     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8683.2010.00843.x     Document Type: Article

References (83)

1. Agrawal, A. & Knoeber, C. R. 1996. Firm performance and mechanisms to control agency problems between managers and shareholders. The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 31: 377-397.
2. Ahmed, A. S. & Duellman, S. 2007. Accounting conservatism and board of director characteristics: An empirical analysis. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 43: 411-437.
3. Aiken, L. S. & West, S. G. 1991. Testing and interpreting interactions in multiple regression. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
4. Amato, L. H. & Amato, C. H. 2007. The effects of firm size and industry on corporate giving. Journal of Business Ethics, 72: 229-241.
5. Amihud, Y. & Lev, B. 1981. Risk reduction as a managerial motive for conglomerate mergers. The Bell Journal of Economics, 605-617.
6. Arora, P. 2008. Organizational slack and attainment discrepancy as antecedents of corporate social performance. The Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings, pp. 1-6 (AN 33653640).
7. Baltagi, B. H., Bresson, G., & Pirotte, A. 2003. Fixed effects, random effects or Hausman - Taylor? A pretest estimator. Economics letters, 79: 361-369.
8. Barnett, M. L. 2007. Stakeholder influence capacity and the variability of financial returns to corporate social responsibility. The Academy of Management Review, 32: 794-816.
9. Baysinger, B. & Hoskisson, R. E. 1990. The composition of boards of directors and strategic control: Effects on corporate strategy. The Academy of Management Review, 15: 72-87.
10. Baysinger, B. D., Kosnik, R. D. & Turk, T. A. 1991. Effects of board and ownership structure on corporate R&D strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 34: 205-214.
11. Bebchuk, L. & Cohen, A. 2005. The costs of entrenched boards. Journal of Financial Economics, 78: 409-433.
12. Bourgeois, III, L. J. 1981. On the measurement of organizational slack. The Academy of Management Review, 6: 29-39.
13. Bromiley, P. 1991. Testing a causal model of corporate risk taking and performance. The Academy of Management Journal, 34: 37-59.
14. Bromiley, P., Miller, K. D., & Rau, D. 2001. Risk in strategic management research. In M. A. Hitt, R. E. Freeman, & J. S. Harrison (Eds.), The Blackwell Handbook of Strategic Management: 259-288. Oxford: Blackwell.
15. Burke, L., Logsdon, J. M., Mitchell, W., Reiner, M., & Vogel, D. 1986. Corporate community involvement in the San Francisco Bay area. California Management Review, 28(3): 122-141.
16. Bushee, B. 1998. The influence of institutional investors on myopic R&D investment behavior. The Accounting Review, 73: 305-333.
17. Chatterji, A., Levine, D., & Toffel, M. 2009. How well do social ratings actually measure corporate social responsibility? Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 18: 125-169.
18. Chen, Y. 2008. Corporate governance and cash holdings: Listed new economy versus old economy firms. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 16: 430-442.
19. Chhaochharia, V. & Grinstein, Y. 2007. Corporate governance and firm value: The impact of the 2002 governance rules. The Journal of Finance, 62: 1789-1825.
20. Chiu, S. & Sharfman, M. P. 2009. Legitimacy, visibility, and the antecedents of corporate social performance: An investigation of instrumental perspective. Journal of Management, Published online on Oct 19, 2009.
21. Coffey, B. & Fryxell, G. E. 1991. Institutional ownership of stock and dimensions of corporate social performance: An empirical examination. Journal of Business Ethics, 10: 437-444.
22. Coffey, B. & Wang, J. 1998. Board diversity and managerial control as predictors of corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 17: 1595-1603.
23. Cohen, J. 2003. Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
24. Cyert, R. M. & March, J. G. 1963. A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NY: Prentice Hall .
25. David, P., Bloom, M., & Hillman, A. J. 2007. Investor activism, managerial responsiveness, and corporate social performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(1).
26. Davis, G. F. 1991. Agents without principles? The spread of the poison pill through the intercorporate network. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36: 583-613.
27. Denis, D. J., Denis, D. K., & Sarin, A. 1997. Agency problems, equity ownership, and corporate diversification. Journal of Finance, 135-160.
28. Deutsch, Y. 2005. The impact of board composition on firms' critical decisions: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Management, 31: 424.
29. Dharwadkar, R., Goranova, M., Brandes, P., & Khan, R. 2008. Institutional ownership and monitoring effectiveness: It's not just how much you own but what else you own. Organization Science, 19: 419-440.
30. Dutta, S., Narasimhan, O. M., & Rajiv, S. 2005. Research notes and commentaries conceptualizing and measuring capabilities: Methodology and empirical application. Strategic Management Journal, 26: 277-285.
31. Edwards, F. R. & Hubbard, R. G. 2000. The growth of institutional stock ownership: A promise unfulfilled. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 13(3): 92-104.
32. Fiegenbaum, A. & Thomas, H. 1988. Attitudes toward risk and the risk-return paradox: Prospect theory explanations. The Academy of Management Journal, 31: 85-106.
33. Finkelstein, S. & Boyd, B. K. 1998. How much does the CEO matter? The role of managerial discretion in the setting of CEO compensation. Academy of Management Journal, 41: 179-199.
34. Finkelstein, S. & Hambrick, D. C. 1990. Top-management-team tenure and organizational outcomes: The moderating role of managerial discretion. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35: 484-503.
35. Fligstein, N. 1991. The structural transformation of American industry: An institutional account of the causes of diversification in the largest firms, 1919-1979. In P. J. DiMaggio & W. W. Powell (Eds.), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis: 311-336. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
36. Geczy, C., Stambaugh, R. F., & Levin, D. 2003. Investing in socially responsible mutual funds. Working paper, Wharton School.
37. Gedajlovic, E. & Shapiro, D. M. 2002. Ownership structure and firm profitability in Japan. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 565-575.
38. George, G. 2005. Slack resources and the performance of privately held firms. The Academy of Management Journal, 48: 661-676.
39. Godfrey, P. C., Merrill, C. B., & Hansen, J. M. 2009. The relationship between corporate social responsibility and shareholder value: An empirical test of the risk management hypothesis. Strategic Management Journal, 30: 425-445.
40. Gompers, P., Ishii, J., & Metrick, A. 2003. Corporate governance and equity prices. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118: 107-155.
41. Graves, S. B. & Waddock, S. A. 1994. Institutional owners and corporate social performance. The Academy of Management Journal, 37: 1034-1046.
42. Haleblian, J. & Finkelstein, S. 1993. Top management team size, CEO dominance, and firm performance: The moderating roles of environmental turbulence and discretion. The Academy of Management Journal, 36: 844-863.
43. Hambrick, D. C. 2007. Upper echelons theory: An update. The Academy of Management Review, 32: 334-343.
44. Hambrick, D. C., Geletkanycz, M. A., & Fredrickson, J. W. 1993. Top executive commitment to the status quo: Some tests of its determinants. Strategic Management Journal, 14: 401-418.
45. Hausman, J. A. & Taylor, W. E. 1981. Panel data and unobservable individual effects. Econometrica, 1377-1398.
46. Hill, C. W. L. & Phan, P. 1991. CEO tenure as a determinant of CEO pay. The Academy of Management Journal, 34: 707-717.
47. Hill, C. W. L. & Snell, S. A. 1988. External control, corporate strategy, and firm performance in research-intensive industries. Strategic Management Journal, 9: 577-590.
48. 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.
49. Hillman, A. J., Nicholson, G., & Shropshire, C. 2008. Directors' multiple identities, identification, and board monitoring and resource provision. Organization Science, 19: 441-458.
50. 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. The Academy of Management Journal, 45: 697-716.
51. Jensen, M. C. 1986. Agency cost of free cash flow, corporate finance, and takeovers. The American Economic Review, 76: 323-329.
52. Johnson, R. A. & Greening, D. W. 1999. The effects of corporate governance and institutional ownership types on corporate social performance. The Academy of Management Journal, 42: 564-576.
53. Kacperczyk, A. 2009. With greater power comes greater responsibility? Takeover protection and corporate attention to stakeholders. Strategic Management Journal, 30: 261-285.
54. Kang, D. L. & Sorensen, A. B. 1999. Ownership organization and firm performance. Annual Review of Sociology, 25: 121-144.
55. Kassinis, G. & Vafeas, N. 2002. Corporate boards and outside stakeholders as determinants of environmental litigation. Strategic Management Journal, 23: 399-415.
56. Kesner, I. F. & Johnson, R. B. 1990. An investigation of the relationship between board composition and stockholder suits. Strategic Management Journal, 11: 327-336.
57. Laidroo, L. 2009. Association between ownership structure and public announcements' disclosures. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 17: 13-34.
58. Lant, T. K. 1992. Aspiration level adaptation: An empirical exploration. Management Science, 38: 623-644.
59. Lorsch, J. & MacIver, E. 1989. Pawns or potentates: The reality of America's corporate boards. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
60. McGuire, J. B., Sundgren, A., & Schneeweis, T. 1988. Corporate social responsibility and firm financial performance. The Academy of Management Journal, 31: 854-872.
61. Mackey, A., Mackey, T. B., & Barney, J. B. 2007. Corporate social responsibility and firm performance: Investor relations and corporate strategies. The Academy of Management Review, 32: 817-835.
62. McWilliams, A. & Siegel, D. 2000. Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: Correlation or misspecification? Strategic Management Journal, 21: 603-609.
63. Maddala, G. S. 2002. Introduction to Econometrics. New York, NY: Prentice-Hall.
64. Mattingly, J. E. & Berman, S. L. 2006. Measurement of corporate social action: Discovering taxonomy in the Kinder Lydenburg Domini ratings data. Business & Society, 45: 20.
65. Morck, R., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. 1988. Management ownership and market valuation: An empirical analysis. Journal of Financial Economics, 20: 293-315.
66. Navarro, P. 1988. Why do corporations give to charity? The Journal of Business, 61: 65-93.
67. Neubaum, D. O. & Zahra, S. A. 2006. Institutional ownership and corporate social performance: The moderating effects of investment horizon, activism, and coordination. Journal of Management, 32: 108.
68. Nohria, N. & Gulati, R. 1996. Is slack good or bad for innovation? The Academy of Management Journal, 39: 1245-1264.
69. Palia, D. 2001. The endogeneity of managerial compensation in firm valuation: A solution. Review of Financial Studies, 14: 735-764.
70. Pfeffer, J. & Salancik, G. R. 1978. The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
71. Pound, J. 1992. Beyond takeovers: Politics comes to corporate control. Harvard Business Review, 70(2): 83-93.
72. Rediker, K. J. & Seth, A. 1995. Boards of directors and substitution effects of alternative governance mechanisms. Strategic Management Journal, 16(2): 85-99.
73. Richard, O. C., Murthi, B. P. S., & Ismail, K. 2007. The impact of racial diversity on intermediate and long-term performance: The moderating role of environmental context. Strategic Management Journal, 28: 1213-1233.
74. Scherer, A. G. & Palazzo, G. 2007. Toward a political conception of corporate responsibility: Business and society seen from a Habermasian perspective. The Academy of Management Review, 32: 1096-1120.
75. Seifert, B., Morris, S. A., & Bartkus, B. R. 2004. Having, giving, and getting: Slack resources, corporate philanthropy, and firm financial performance. Business & Society, 43(2): 135.
76. Social Investment Forum 2010. Report on Socially Responsible Investing Trends in the United States. .
77. Spicer, B. H. 1978. Investors, corporate social performance, and information disclosure: An empirical study. The Accounting Review, 53: 94-111.
78. Strike, V. M., Gao, J., & Bansal, P. 2006. Being good while being bad: Social responsibility and the international diversification of US firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 37: 850-862.
79. Waddock, S. & Graves, S. 1997. The corporate social performance - Financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18: 303-319.
80. Wahal, S. 1996. Pension fund activism and firm performance. The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 31: 1-23.
81. Wang, J. & Coffey, B. S. 1992. Board composition and corporate philanthropy. Journal of Business Ethics, 11: 771-778.
82. Zahra, S. A. 1996. Governance, ownership, and corporate entrepreneurship: The moderating impact of industry technological opportunities. Academy of Management Journal, 39: 1713-1735.
83. Zahra, S., Oviatt, B., & Minyard, K. 1993. Effects of corporate ownership and board structure on corporate social responsibility and financial performance. Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings, 336-340 (AN 10317088).