The Extensiveness of Corporate Social and Environmental Commitment across Firms over Time

Abstract

Corporate social commitment (CSC) and corporate environmental commitment (CEC) are often combined under the general rubric of corporate social responsibility. Although the two sets of activities are similar, they are also very different. Both CSC and CEC respond to issues raised by stakeholders, but CEC tends to be more "technical". This characteristic demands that CEC fit with the organization, which exposes greater economic opportunities than CSC. As a result, we argue that the extent to which these practices are implemented differs across firms over time. We analyze the extensiveness of implementation of CSC and CEC across 266 firms from 1991 to 2003, using latent growth curve modeling and one-way ANOVA. We find that firms moved towards at least a moderate level of CSC over time, but tended to bifurcate in the extent to which they implemented CEC practices, towards either the high or low end of the scale, over time. In this paper, we contribute to the institutional analysis of practice diffusion by examining how the characteristics of different kinds of practices shape the extensiveness of firm adoption patterns. As well, this research also speaks to corporate social responsibility researchers, pointing to the need to sometimes discriminate between social and environmental practices.

Strategic flexibility, green management, and firm competitiveness in an emerging economy

“…We answer the aforementioned questions by employing two firmlevel theories, the dynamic capability perspective and institutional theory, to explain the factors that contribute to variations in the GMP adoption and their effects on firm competitiveness. Technological Forecasting & Social Change xxx (2015) xxx-xxx Firm-level resource investments in GM must be flexible to respond to the reversibility of these resource commitments (Rugman and Verbeke, 1998) due to substantial costs of compliance (Bansal et al, 2014), especially in emerging economies where firms typically face resource or capability deficits (Peng and Luo, 2000). Such strategic flexibility, defined as one dynamic capability that enables firms to rapidly and effectively reconfigure and reallocate resources and capabilities to respond to environmental changes (Sanchez, 1995(Sanchez, , 1997, is a critical internal perspective for emerging economy firms to implement strategic practices such as GMPs.…”

Explaining SME engagement in local sourcing: The roles of location-specific resources and patriotism

“…As environmental stewardship may provide entrepreneurial opportunities for value creation (Cohen and Winn, 2007), the pursuit of sustainability and profitability is not necessarily in conflict and can in fact complement each other (Dean and McMullen, 2007;Schaper, 2002). However, previous research also suggests that many firms still struggle to incorporate sustainability initiatives into their business (Bansal et al, 2014). For instance, local sourcing is not always the default option for 2 International Small Business Journal firms because local products may not enjoy the same 'taken-for-granted' aspect among local customers or other stakeholders, compared to globally sourced products or models which carry more legitimacy (Frenkel and Shenhav, 2003;Ritzer, 2007;Voronov et al, 2013;Weber et al, 2009).…”

Changing words: How temporal consistency in a CEO's use of language toward shareholders and stakeholders affects CEO dismissal

“…Despite its importance, few empirical studies have examined signaling action toward stakeholders over a long period of time. Recent studies have examined temporal dimensions of stakeholder‐oriented activities (Bansal, Gao, & Qureshi, ; Shropshire & Hillman, ), but these studies have focused on concrete activities rather than signaling actions. In an in‐depth study of multinational firms, Crilly et al (, ) explored how firms respond to diverse expectations of stakeholders and how heterogeneous stakeholders evaluate the firm's signals about sustainability.…”