No abstract

This article addresses four hypotheses: (a) that corporate social responsibility (CSR) in Asia is not homogeneous but varies among countries, (b) that the variation is explained by stages of development, (c) that globalization enhances the adoption of CSR in Asia, and (d) that national business systems structure the profile of multinational corporations' CSR. These hypotheses are investigated through analysis of Web site reporting of 50 companies in seven Asian countries: India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, South Korea, Singapore, and Thailand. The article concludes that CSR does vary considerably among Asian countries but that this variation is not explained by development but by factors in the respective national business systems. It also concludes that multinational companies are more likely to adopt CSR than those operating solely in their home country but that the profile of their CSR tends to reflect the profile of the country of operation rather than the country of origin.

The question of what drives corporate social performance (CSP) has become a vital concern for many managers and researchers of large corporations. This study addresses this question by adopting a multilevel, multistakeholder, and multimethod approach to theorize and estimate the relative influence of macro (national business system and country), meso (industry), and micro (firm-level) factors on CSP. Applying three different methods of variance decomposition analysis to an international sample of 2,060 large public companies over a time span of 5 years, our results show that firm-level factors explain the largest proportion of variance in aggregate CSP as well as CSP oriented toward communities, the natural environment, and employees. These results support our hypotheses according to which CSP is not primarily driven by macrolevel or mesolevel factors, except for shareholderoriented CSP, which is relatively more influenced by country-level factors. As a whole, our findings also point to the value of subdividing CSP into its stakeholder-specific components as this disaggregation allows for a more careful examination of distinct drivers of distinct aspects of CSP.Keywords: Corporate social performance; corporate social responsibility; decomposition of variance; hierarchical linear modeling; stakeholders; variance components analysis.Abbreviations: ANOVA = analysis of variance; CSP = corporate social performance; HLM = hierarchical linear modeling; MLE = maximum likelihood estimation; NBS = national business system; REMLE = restricted maximum likelihood estimation; VCA = variance components analysis.Unpacking 2

corporate citizenship, corporate community involvement, community participation, social interaction, stakeholder relationships, developing countries,

University technology transfer offices (henceforth, TTOs) play a critical role in the diffusion of innovation and the development of new technology infrastructure. Studies of the relative efficiency of TTOs have been based on licensing output measures and data from a single country. In contrast, we present the first cross-country comparison of the relative performance of TTOs, based on stochastic multiple output distance functions. The additional dimension of output considered is the university's propensity to generate start-up companies, based on technologies developed at these institutions. We find that US universities are more efficient than UK universities and that the production process is characterized by either decreasing or constant returns to scale. Universities with a medical school and an incubator are closer to the frontier.Technology transfer office, Technology licensing, University spin-offs (USO) patents, Stochastic distance functions,