"Triple bottom line" as "sustainable corporate performance": A proposition for the future

Sustainability

Volumn 2, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 1345-1360

  Fauzi, Hasan ^a   Svensson, Goran ^b   Rahman, Azhar Abdul ^c  

^a SEBELAS MARET UNIVERSITY   (Indonesia)

^b Oslo School of Management   (Norway)

^c UNIVERSITI UTARA MALAYSIA   (Malaysia)

Author keywords

Corporate social performance; Financial performance; Sustainable corporate performance; Triple bottom line

Indexed keywords

EID: 84858198154     PISSN: 20711050     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3390/su2051345     Document Type: Article

References (80)

1. Daft, R.L. Management; Dryden Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 1991.
2. Lenz, R.T. Environmental strategy, organization structure and performance: Pattern in one industry. Strateg. Manage. J. 1980, 1, 209-226.
3. Venktrakaman, N.; Ramanugan, V. Measurement of business performance in strategy research: A comparative of approach. Acad. Manage. Rev. 1986, 11, 801-814.
4. Kaplan, R.S.; Norton, D.P. The balanced scorecard: Measures that drive performance. Harvard Bus. Rev. 1992, January-February, 71-80.
5. Simons, R. Levers of Control: How Managers Use Innovative Control Systems to Drive Strategic Renewal; Harvard Business School Press: Boston, MA, USA. 1995.
6. Simons, R. Performance Measurement and Control System for Implementing Strategy: Text and Cases; Prentice Hall: Old Tappan, NJ, USA, 2000.
7. Donaldson, T.; Preston, L.E. The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concept, evidence, and implications. Acad. Manage. Rev. 1995, 20, 65-91.
8. Simons, R. Accounting control systems and business strategy: An empirical analysis. Account. Organ. Soc. 1987, 12, 357-374.
9. Govindarajan, V.; Fisher, J. Strategy, control system and resource sharing: Effect on business-unit performance. Acad. Manage. J. 1990, 33, 259-285.
10. Govindarajan, V. A contingency approach to a strategy implementation at the business-unit level: Integrating an administrative mechanism with strategy. Acad. Manage.J. 1988, 31, 838-853.
11. Liao, Y.S. Business strategy and performance: The role of human resource management control. Pers. Rev. 2005, 34, 294-309.
12. Azumi, K.; Hage, J. Organization System; Heath and Company Lexington: Washington, DC, USA, 1972.
13. Gul, F.A. The effect of management accounting system and environment uncertainty on small business managers' performance. Account. Bus. Res. 1992, 22, 57-61.
14. Chenhall, R.H.; Morris, D. The impact of structure, environment, and interdependency on the perceived usefulness of management accounting system. Account. Rev. 1986, 61, 16-35.
15. Abernethy, M.A.; Brownell, P. The role of budgets in organizations facing strategic change: An exploratory study. Account. Organ. Soc. 1999, 24, 189-204.
16. Davila, T. An empirical study on the drivers of management control systems' design in new product development. Account. Organ. Soc. 2000, 25, 383-409.
17. Marginson, D.E. Management control system and their effect on strategy formation at middle-management level: Evidence from a UK organization. Strate. Manage. J. 2002, 23, 1019-1031.
18. Salmon, S.; Joiner, T. How integrative management accounting information and role ambiguity influence managerial performance. In Proceedings of the 19th Australia and New Zealand Academy of Management Conference: Engaging the Multiple Contexts of Management, Canberra, Australia, 7-10 December 2005.
19. Coenders, G.; Bisbe, J.; Saris, W.E.; Batista-Foguet, J.M. Moderating Effects of Management Control Systems and Innovation on Performance. Simple Methods for Correcting the Effects of Measurement Error for Interaction Effects in Small Samples; Working Papers of the Department of Economics, University of Girona: Girona, Spain, 2003.
20. Alexander, J.W.; Alan, R.W. The fit between technology and structure as predictor of performance. Acad. Manage. J. 1985, 28, 844-859.
21. Langfield-Smith, K. Management control systems and strategy: A critical review. Account. Organ. Soc. 1997, 22, 207-232.
22. Waddock, S.A.; Graves, S.M. The corporate social performance-financial performance link. Strateg. Manage. J. 1997, 18, 303-319.
23. Dean, K.L. The chicken and the egg revisited: Ties between corporate social performance and the financial bottom line. Acad. Manage. Exec. 1988, 2, 99-100.
24. Orlitzky, M.; Schmidt, F.L.; Rynes, S.L. Corporate social and financial performance: A Meta analysis. Organ. Stud. 2003, 24, 403-441.
25. Cochran, P.L.; Wood, R.A. Corporate social performance and financial performance. Acad. Manage. J. 1984, 27, 42-56.
26. Shane, P.B.; Spicer, B.H. Market response to environmental information produced outside the firm. Account. Rev.1983, 58, 521-538..
27. Preston, L.E. Analyzing corporate social performance: Methods and results. J. Contemp. Bus. 1978, 7, 135-150.
28. Vance, S. Are socially responsible firms good investment risks? Manage. Rev. 1975, 64, 18-24.
29. Simerly, R.L. Corporate social performance and firms' financial performance: An alternative perspective. Psychol. Rep. 1994, 75, 1091-1103.
30. Pava, M.L.; Krausz, J. The association between corporate social-responsibility and financial performance: The paradox of social cost. J. Bus. Ethics 2002, 15, 321-357.
31. Turban, D.B.; Greening, D.W. Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employee. Acad. Manage. J. 1996, 40, 658-672.
32. Russo, M.V.; Fouts, P.A. A resource-based perspective on corporate environmental performance and profitability. Acad. Manage. J. 1997, 40, 534-559.
33. Mahoney, L.S.; Roberts, R.W. Corporate social performance, financial performance and institutional ownership in Canadian Firms. Account. Forum 2007, 31, 233-253.
34. Stanwick, P.A.; Stanwick, S.D. The relationship between corporate social performance and organizational size, financial performance, and environmental performance: An empirical examination. J. Bus. Ethics 1998, 17, 195-204.
35. Moore, G. Corporate social and financial performance: An investigation in the UK supermarket industry. J. Bus. Ethics 2001, 34, 299-315.
36. Reimann, B.C. Organizational effectiveness and management's public values: A canonical analysis. Acad. Manage. J. 1975, 18, 224-241.
37. Wartick, S.L. How issues management contributes to corporate performance. Business Forum 1988, 13, 16-22.
38. Barnett, M.L. Stakeholder influence capacity and the variability of financial returns to corporate social responsibility. Acad. Manage. Rev. 2007, 32, 794-816.
39. Carroll, A.B. A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate social performance. Acad. Manage. Rev. 1979, 4, 497-506.
40. Carroll, A.B. Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Bus. Soc. 1999, 33, 268-295.
41. Wood, D.J. Corporate social performance revisited. Acad. Manage. Rev. 1991, 16, 691-718.
42. Wartick, S.L.; Cochran, P.L. The evolution of the corporate social performance model. Acad. Manage. Rev. 1985, 10, 758-769.
43. Clarkson, M.B.E. A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporation social performance. Acad. Manage. Rev. 1995, 20, 92-117.
44. Gerde, V.W.; Wokutch, R. 25 years and going strong: A content analysis of the first 25 years of the social issues in management division proceedings. Bus. Soc. 1988, 37, 414-446.
45. Igalens, J.; Gond, J.P. Measuring corporate social performance in France: A critical and empirical analysis of ARESE data. J. Bus. Ethics 2005, 56, 131-148.
46. Anderson, G.J.; Frankle, A.W. Voluntary social reporting: An iso-beta portfolio analysis. Account. Rev. 1980, 55, 467-486.
47. Gray, R.H.; Kouhy, R.; Lavers, S. Corporate social and environmental reporting: A review of the literature and a longitudinal study of UK disclosure. Account. Audit. Account. J. 1995, 8, 47-77.
48. Gray, R.H.; Kouhy, R.; Lavers, S. Constructing a research database of social and environmental reporting by UK companies: A methodological note. Account. Audit. Account. J. 1995, 8, 78-101.
49. Patten, D.M. The relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: A research note. Account. Organ. Soc. 2002, 27, 763-773.
50. Adams, C. Harte The changing portrayal of the employment of women in British bank and retail companies: Corporate annual reports. Account. Organ. Soc. 1998, 23, 781-812.
51. Spencer, B.A.; Taylor, S.G. A Within and Between Analysis of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and financial performance. Akron Bus. Econ. Rev. 1987, 18, 7-18.
52. McGuire, J.B.; Sundgren, A.; Schneeweis, T. Corporate social responsibility and firm financial performance. Acad. Manage. J. 1988, 3, 854-872.
53. Fombrun, C.; Shanley, M. What's in a name? Reputation building and corporate strategy. Acade. Manage. J. 1990, 33, 233-258.
54. Brown, B.; Perry, S. Removing the financial performance halo from fortune's most admired companies. Acad. Manage. J. 1994, 37, 1346-1359.
55. Brown, B.; Susan Perry, S. Halo-removed residuals of Fortune's responsibility to the community and environment: A decade of data. Bus. Soc. 1995, 34, 199-215.
56. Simerly, R.L. Institutional ownership, corporate social performance, and firms' financial performance. Psychol. Rep. 1995, 77, 515-525.
57. Sharfman, M. A concurrent validity study of the KLD Social Performance Ratings data. J. Bus. Ethics 1996, 15, 287-296.
58. Belkaoui, A. The impact of the disclosure of the environmental effects of organizational behavior on the market. Finan. Manage. 1976, 5, 26-31.
59. Chen, K.H.; Metcalf, R.W. The relationship between pollution control record and financial indicators revisited. Account. Rev. 1980, 55, 168-177.
60. Shane, P.B.; Spicer, B.H. Market response to environmental information produced outside the firm. Account. Rev. 1983, 58, 521-538.
61. Wartick, S.L. How issues management contributes to corporate performance. Bus. Forum 1988, 13, 16-22.
62. Stark, A. What's the matter with business ethics? Harvard Bus. Rev. 1993, 71, 38-48.
63. Aupperle, K.E.; Carroll, A.B.; Hatfield, A.D. An empirical examination of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and profitability. Acade. Manage. J. 1985, 28, 446-463.
64. Ingram, R.W.; Frazier, K.B. Environmental performance and corporate disclosure. J. Account. Res. 1980, 18, 614-622.
65. O'Neill, H.M.; Saunders, C.B; McCarthy, A.D. Board members, corporate social responsiveness and profitability: Are tradeoffs necessary? J. Bus. Ethics 1980, 8, 353-357.
66. Hansen, G.S.; Wernerfelt, B. Determinants of firm performance: The relative importance of economic and organizational factors. Strateg. Manage. J. 1989, 10, 399-411.
67. Margolis, J.D.; Walsh, J.P. Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Adm. Science Quart. 2003, 48, 268-305.
68. Itkonen, L. Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance; Institute of Strategy and International Business: Hilsinki, Finland, 2003.
69. Frederick, W.C; Post, E.J.; Davis, K. Business and Society: Corporate Strategy, Public Policy, and Ethics; McGraw-Hill International Edition: Singapore, 1992.
70. Atkinson, A.A.; Waterhouse, J.H.; Wells, R.B. A stakeholder approach to strategic performance measurement. Sloan Manage. Rev. 1997, 38, 25-37.
71. Nickols, F. The Stakeholder Scorecard a Stakeholder-based Approach to Keeping Score, 2000; Available online: http://home.att.net/~nickols/articles.htm (accessed on 21 December 2008).
72. The Triple Bottom Line: Does It All Add Up? Henriques, A., Richardson, J., Eds.; Earthscan: London, UK, 2004.
73. Elkington, J. Towards the sustainable corporation: Win-win-win business strategies for Sustainable Corporationable Development. Calif. Manage. Rev. 1994, 36, 90-100.
74. O'Donovan, G. The social bottom line. Aust. CPA 2002, 72, 66-69.
75. Hubbard, G. Sustainable organisation performance: Towards a practical measurement system. Monash Bus. Rev. 2006, 2, 25-29.
76. Colbert, B.A.; Kurucz, E.C. Three conceptions of triple bottom line business sustainability and the role for HRM. Hum. Resour. Plan. 2007, 30, 21-29.
77. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis-Summary for Policymakers; IPCC WGI Fourth Assessment Report; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC): Geneva, Switzerland, 2007.
78. Svensson, G. Anti-Climate Change Management (ACCM)-"Business-as-Usual" or "Out-of-the-Box? Manage. Decis. 2008, 46, 92-105.
79. Griffin, J.J.; Mahon, J.F. The corporate social performance and corporate financial performance debate: Twenty-five years of incomparable research. Bus. Soc. 1997, 36, 5-31.
80. Murphy, E.; Verschoor, C. Best corporate citizens have better financial performance. Strateg. Financ. 2002, 83, 20-22.