Board reputation attributes and corporate social performance: An empirical investigation of the US Best Corporate Citizens

Accounting and Business Research

Volumn 41, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 119-144

  Mallin, Christine A ^a   Michelon, G ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PADOVA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Board of directors; Community influential directors; Corporate social performance; Stakeholder theory; Women on the board

Indexed keywords

EID: 79959741331     PISSN: 00014788     EISSN: 21594260     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00014788.2011.550740     Document Type: Article

References (90)

1. Adams, R.B. and Ferreira, D., 2009.Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. Journal of financial economics, 94, 291-309.
2. Aguilera, R.,Williams, C., Conley, J., and Rupp, D., 2006. Corporate governance and social responsibility: a comparative analysis of the UK and the US. Corporate governance an international review, 14 (3), 147-158. (Pubitemid 43678702)
3. Al-Tuwaijri, S., Christensen, T.E., and Hughes, K.E., 2003. The relations among environmental disclosure, environmental performance, and economic performance: a simultaneous equations approach. Accounting, organizations and society, 29 (5-6), 447-471. (Pubitemid 38341250)
4. Baron, D., 1995. Integrated strategy: market and nonmarket components. California management review, 37 (2), 47-65.
5. Baysinger, B.D. and Hoskisson, R.E., 1990. The composition of boards of directors and strategic control:effects on corporate strategy. Academy of Management review, 15 (1), 72-87.
6. Baysinger, B.D. and Zardkoohi, A., 1986. Technology, residual claimantsand corporate control. Journal of law, economics, and organisation, 2 (2), 339-344.
7. Bazerman, M. and Schoorman, F., 1983. A limited rationality model of interlocking directorates. Academy of Management review, 8, 206-217.
8. Berle, A. and Means, G., 1932. The modern corporation and private property. New York: Macmillan.
9. Bilimoria, D., 2000. Building the business case for women corporate directors. In: R.J. Burke and M.C. Mattis, eds. Women on corporate boards of directors: international challenges and opportunities. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, 25-40.
10. Brammer, S., Brooks, C., and Pavelin, S., 2006. Corporate social performance and stock returns: UK evidence from disaggregate measures. Financial management, Autumn, 97-116. (Pubitemid 44662005)
11. Brennan, N.M. and Solomon, J., 2008. Corporate governance, accountability and mechanisms of accountability: an overview. Accounting, auditing and accountability journal, 21 (7), 885-906.
12. Brown, N. and Deegan, C., 1998. The public disclosure of environmentalperformance information - a dual test of media agenda setting theory and legitimacy theory. Accounting and business research, 29 (1), 21-41.
13. Burke, L., Logsdon, J.M., Mitchell,W., Reiner, M., and Vogel, D., 1986. Corporate community involvement in the San Francisco Bay area. California management review, 28 (3), 122-141.
14. Carpenter,M. andWestphal, J., 2001. The strategic context of external network ties: examining the impact of director appointments on board involvement in strategic decision-making. Academy of Management journal, 44, 639-660.
15. Carroll, A.B., 1979. A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporatesocial performance. Academy of Management review, 4, 497-505.
16. Carroll, A.B., 1991. The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: toward the moral management of organisational stakeholders. Business horizons, 34 (July-August), 39-48.
17. Carver, J., 1990. Boards that make a difference. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
18. Certo, T., Covin, J.G., Daily, C.M., and Dalton, D.R., 2001. Wealth and the effects of founder management among IPO-stage new ventures. Strategic management journal, 22, 641-658. (Pubitemid 33612462)
19. Cho, C. and Patten, D.M., 2007. The role of environmental disclosures as tools of legitimacy: a research note. Accounting, organizations and society, 32 (7-8), 639-647.
20. Cho, C.H., Patten, D.M., and Roberts, R.W., 2006. Corporate political strategy: an examination of the relation between political expenditures, environmental performance, and environmental disclosure. Journal of business ethics, 67 (2), 139-154. (Pubitemid 44395399)
21. Clarkson, M.B.E., 1995. A stakeholder framework for analysing and evaluating corporate performance. Academy of Management review, 20 (1), 92-117.
22. Coffey, B.S. and Wang, J., 1998. Board diversity and managerial control as predictors of corporate social performance. Journal of business ethics, 17, 1595-1603. (Pubitemid 128184556)
23. Cowen, S.S., Ferreri, L.B., and Parker, L.D., 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. David, P., Bloom, M., and Hillman, A., 2007. Investor activism, managerial responsiveness, and corporate social performance. Strategic management journal, 28, 91-100. (Pubitemid 46065922)
25. de Quevedo-Puente, E., de la Fuente-Sabaté, J.M., and Fombrun, C.J., 2007. Corporate social performance and corporate reputation: two interwovenperspectives. Corporate reputation review, 10 (1), 60-72.
26. Deakin, S. and Whittaker, H., 2007. Re-embedding the corporation? Comparative perspectives on corporate governance, employment relations and corporate social responsibility. Corporate governance: an international review, 15 (1), 1-4.
27. Deephouse, D.L., 2000. Media reputation as a strategic resource: an integration of mass communication and resource-based theories. Journal of management, 26, 1091-1112.
28. Di Pietra, R., Grambovas, C.A., Raonic, I., and Riccaboni, A., 2008. The effects of board size and 'busy' directors on the market value of Italian companies. Journal of management and governance, 12, 73-91.
29. Dierkes, M. and Preston, L., 1977. Corporate social accounting and reporting for the physical environment: a critical review and implementation proposal. Accounting, organizations and society, 2 (1), 3-22.
30. Dowling, J. and Pfeffer, J., 1975. Organisational legitimacy: social values and organisational behaviour. Pacific sociological review, 18 (1), 122-136.
31. Eagly, A.H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M.C., and van Engen, M.L., 2003. Transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles: a meta-analysis comparing women and men. Psychological bulletin, 129(4), 569-591. (Pubitemid 37189323)
32. Elsbach, K., 1994. Managing organisational legitimacy in the California cattle industry: the construction and effectiveness of verbal accounts. Administrative science quarterly, 39 (1), 57-88.
33. Fama, E.F. and Jensen, M., 1983. Separation of ownership and control. Journal of law and economics, 26 (2), 301-326.
34. Finkelstein, S. and D́'Aveni, R.A., 1994. CEO duality as a double-edgedsword: how boards of directors balance entrenchment avoidance and unity of command. Academy of Management journal, 37 (5), 1079-1108.
35. Fombrun, C.J. and Rindova, V., 1994. Reputational rankings: institutionalizing social audits of corporate performance. In: S. Wartick and D. Collins, eds. Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Meeting of the International Association for Business and Society. 216-221.
36. Forker, J.J., 1992. Corporate governance and disclosure quality. Accounting and business research, 22 (1), 111-124.
37. Gales, L.M. and Kesener, I.F., 1994. An analysis of board of director size and composition in bankrupt organisations. Journal of business research, 30 (3), 271-282.
38. Goodstein, J. and Boeker, W., 1991. Turbulence at the top: a new perspective on governance structure changes and strategic change. Academy of Management journal, 34 (2), 306-330.
39. Haniffa, R.M. and Cooke, T.E., 2005. The impact of culture and governance on corporate social reporting. Journal of accounting and public policy, 24 (5), 391-430. (Pubitemid 41554881)
40. Hillman, A.J., Cannella, A.A.Jr., and Harris, I.C., 2002.Women and racial minorities in the boardroom: how do directors differ? Journal of management, 28, 747-763.
41. Hillman, A.J., Cannella, J., and Paetzold, A.A., 2000. The resource dependence role of corporate directors: strategic adaptation of board composition in response to environmental change. Journal of management studies, 37 (2), 235-255.
42. Hillman, A.J. and Dalziel, T., 2003. Boards of directors and firm performance: integrating agency and resource dependence perspectives. Academy of Management review, 28 (3), 383-396. (Pubitemid 36881221)
43. Hillman, A.J. and Keim, G.D., 2001. Shareholder value, stakeholder management and social issues: what's the bottom line? Strategic Management Journal, 22 (2), 125-139. (Pubitemid 33617225)
44. Hillman, A.J., Keim, G.D., and Luce, R.A., 2001. Board composition andstakeholder performance: do stakeholder directors make a difference? Business and society, 40 (3), 295-314.
45. Hillman, A.J., Zardkoohi, A., and Bierman, L., 1999. Corporate political strategies and firm performance: indications of firm-specific benefits from personal service in the US government. Strategic management journal, 20(1), 67-81.
46. Huse, M., 2003. Renewing management and governance: new paradigms of governance? Journal of management and governance, 7 (3), 211-221.
47. Husted, B.W. and Allen, D., 2000. Is it ethical to use ethics as strategy? Journal of business ethics, 27 (1-2), 21-31.
48. Jensen, M.C., 1993. The modern industrial revolution, exit, and the failure of internal control systems. Journal of finance, 48 (3), 831-880.
49. Jensen, M.C. and Meckling, W.H., 1976. Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of financial economics, 3, 305-360.
50. Johnson, R. and Greening, D., 1999. The effects of corporate governance and institutional ownership on corporate social performance. Academy of Management journal, 42, 564-580.
51. Kassinis, G. and Vafeas, N., 2002. Corporate boards and outside stakeholders as determinants of environmental litigation. Strategic management journal, 23 (5), 399-415. (Pubitemid 34452921)
52. Kesner, I.F., 1988. Directors' characteristics and committee membership: an investigation of type, occupation, tenure, and gender. Academy of Management journal, 31, 66-84.
53. Koenig, T. and Gogel, R., 1981. Interlocking corporate directorships as a social network. American journal of economics and sociology, 40, 37-50.
54. Lam, K. and Li, Y., 2007. Does corporate governance matter? The case of environmental and social responsibility committees in the board, Canadian Academic Accounting Association conference, Halifax, Canada.
55. Lipton, M. and Lorsch, J.W., 1992. A modest proposal for improved corporate governance. Business lawyer, 48 (1), 59-77.
56. Lorsch, J.W. and MacIver, E., 1989. Pawns or potentates: the reality of America's corporate boards. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
57. Luoma, P. and Goodstein, J., 1999. Stakeholders and corporate boards: institutional influences on board composition and structure. Academy of Management journal, 42, 553-563.
58. Markarian, G. and Parbonetti, A., 2007. Firm complexity and board of director composition. Corporate governance: an international review, 15 (6),1224-1243.
59. McWilliams, A. and Siegel, D., 2000. Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: correlation or misspecification? Strategic management journal, 21, 603-609.
60. Michelon, G. and Parbonetti, A., ed., 2010. Stakeholder engagement: corporate governance and sustainability disclosure. Journal of management and governance, doi:10.1007/s10997-010-9160-3.
61. Mintzberg, H., 1983. Structure in fives: designing effective organisations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
62. Neter, J., Kutner, M.H., Nachtsteim, C.J., and Wasserman, W., 1996. Applied linear statistical models. 4th ed. Boston, MA: Irwin.
63. Neu, D., Warsame, H., and Pedwell, K., 1998. Managing public impressions: environmental disclosures in annual reports. Accounting, organisations and society, 23 (3), 265-282. (Pubitemid 128340520)
64. Nielsen, S. and Huse, M., 2010. The contribution of women on boards ofdirectors: going beyond the surface. Corporate governance: an international review, 18, 136-148.
65. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation Development), 2004. OECD principles of corporate governance, Available from: www.oecd.org.
66. Pfeffer, J., 1972. Size and composition of corporate boards of directors: the organisation and its environment. Administrative science quarterly,17, 218-228.
67. Pfeffer, J. and Salancik, G.R., 1978. The external control of organisations: a resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row.
68. Post, J.E., Preston, L.E., and Sachs, S., 2002. Redefining the corporation, stakeholder management and organisational wealth. Stanford, CT: Stanford University Press.
69. Provan, K.G., 1980. Board power and organisational effectiveness amonghuman service agencies. Academy of Management journal, 23 (2), 221-236.
70. Rao, H., 1994. The social construction of reputation: certification contests, legitimation, and the survival of organisations in the American automobile industry:1895-1912. Strategic management journal, 15 (Winter), 29-44.
71. Roberts, J., McNulty, T., and Stiles, P., 2005. Beyond agency conceptions of the work of the non-executive director: creating accountability in the boardroom. British journal of management, 16 (1), 5-26.
72. Salancik, G.R. and Meindl, J.R., 1984. Corporate attributions as strategic illusions of management control. Administrative science quarterly, 29 (2), 238-254.
73. Selznick, P., 1949. TVA and the grass roots. Berkeley: University of California Press.
74. Selznick, P., 1992. The moral commonwealth. Berkeley: University of California Press.
75. Siciliano, J.I., 1996. The relationship of board member diversity to organisational performance. Journal of business ethics 15. 1313-1320. (Pubitemid 126175413)
76. Suchman, M.C., 1995. Managing legitimacy: strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management journal, 20 (3), 571-610.
77. Tirole, J., 2001. Corporate governance. Econometrica, 69 (1), 1-35. (Pubitemid 33635738)
78. Ullman, 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 (3), 540-577.
79. Unerman, J. and Bennett, M., 2004. Increased stakeholder dialogue and the internet: towards greater corporate accountability or reinforcing capitalist hegemony? Accounting, organizations and society, 29 (7), 685-707. (Pubitemid 39332597)
80. Waddock, S.A. and Graves, S.B., 1997. The corporate social performance - financial performance link. Strategic management journal, 18 (4), 303-319. (Pubitemid 127467154)
81. Wang, J. and Dewhirst, H.D., 1992. Boards of directors and stakeholderorientation. Journal of business ethics, 11, 115-123.
82. Wartick, S.L. and Cochran, P.L., 1985. The evolution of the corporate social performance model. Academy of Management review, 10, 758-769.
83. Webb, E., 2004. An examination of socially responsible firmś' board structure. Journal of management and governance, 8, 255-277. (Pubitemid 39604445)
84. Westphal, J., 1999. Collaboration in the boardroom: behavioural and performance consequences of CEOboard social ties. Academy of Management journal, 42, 7-25.
85. Wood, D.J., 1991. Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management review, 16, 691-718.
86. Wooldridge, J.M., 2002. Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
87. Worthy, J.C. and Neuschel, R.P., 1983. Emerging issues in corporate governance. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
88. Xie, B., Davidson, W.N. III, and DaDalt, P.J., 2003. Earnings management and corporate governance: the role of the board and the audit committee. Journal of corporate finance, 9, 295-316. (Pubitemid 36106925)
89. Zahra, S.A. and Pearce, J.A. II, 1989. Boards of directors and corporate financial performance: a review and integrative model. Journal of management, 15 (2), 291-334.
90. Zahra, S.A. and Stanton,W.W., 1988. The implications of board of directorś' composition for corporate strategy and performance. International journal of management, 5, 229-236.