How and why small to medium size enterprises (SMEs) engage with their communities: an Australian study

Abstract

SUMMARY/ABSTRACTWhile many studies address corporate philanthropy and corporate community involvement, limited work has been conducted internationally in small to medium businesses and even less has been elucidated about the Australian small business landscape. This article reports findings from qualitative research investigating giving to community causes by 52 small to medium size enterprises (SMEs) across Australia. Three key questions addressed in this article are: (1) why SMEs engage with community (2) how they engage with community and (3) obstacles they perceive in giving. Our findings suggest that SMEs have a preference to avoid cash gifts, prefer to support local causes and would benefit from the development of best practice giving guidelines and templates.

Examining the Influence of the Individual in Arts Sponsorship Decisions

“…This personal experience with the arts organization appears at first to resonate with earlier literature discussing personal preferences of managers being influential (Brammer & Millington, 2004;Madden et al, 2006;Werbel & Carter, 2002). However, respondents from both sides of the dyad in each case appeared to view the advocate's knowledge more as information that contributed to the evaluation of the property.…”

“…Some authors have found no evidence to suggest personal influence (Bartkus, Morris, & Seifert, 2002;Navarro, 1988), while other research suggests personal interests may play a role (Brammer & Millington, 2004;Campbell, Moore, & Metzger, 2002;Madden et al, 2006;Wang & Coffey, 1992;Werbel & Carter, 2002). In these later studies, the finger is typically pointed to the high level executive, such as the CEO (Brammer et al, 2006) or members of the board (Wang & Coffey, 1992).…”

“…Accordingly nonprofit managers try to understand the companies they are approaching-their needs, their goals, why they might take on this support role, and how they make their decisions. Much has been done in sponsorship and corporate philanthropy literature concerning the objectives and motivations for corporate support of nonprofits (Hoek, Gendall, & West, 1990;Madden, Scaife, & Crissman, 2006;McAlister & Ferrell, 2002;Robinson, 2006). Within this literature, and related to decision making in particular, we find that objectives and motivations are often linked with personal objectives and/or personal influence of a single individual (e.g., Brammer & Millington, 2004;Thjømøe, Olson, & Brønn, 2002).…”

Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Size

“…As larger firms tend to have a bigger social impact, given the scale of their activities (Cowen et al, 1987), it is deemed equitable that the onus to be socially responsible also falls on them, rather than on small firms. Surprisingly, evidence suggests that many smaller firms tend to be involved in CSR activities in some way, particularly through donations and giving (Madden et al, 2006). The question, therefore, arises, what motivates such CSR participation by smaller firms, and moreover, is it economically justified?…”

“…Out of these, the issue of firm size is identified as both vital and relatively unexamined (Madden et al, 2006). Firm size can affect strategic motivation, thereby having a positive effect on CSR participation (Adams and Hardwick, 1998;McElroy and Siegfred, 1985).…”