scholarly journals Firms’ Board Independence and Corporate Social Performance: A Meta-Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 1006 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Igor Álvarez ◽  
Eugenio Zubeltzu
2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 99
Author(s):  
Jun Hyeok Choi ◽  
Saerona Kim ◽  
Ayoung Lee

The purpose of this study was to examine the association between Chief Executive Officer (CEO) tenure and corporate social performance with the moderating effect of governance. We investigated whether new CEOs and CEOs in their last year of service were more focused on short-termism than CEOs of other periods. Specifically, we tested whether these CEOs reduced social performance that demands immediate expenditure and expect payoffs in the long run. We also tested whether good governance can mitigate such behaviors, because not all CEOs of the same tenure will act the same, depending on the monitoring environments surrounding them. We employed ordinary least squares (OLS) method and the moderator models using data from the Korean listed companies from 2012 to 2016. Test results showed that only the CEOs of their last year reduced social performance. However, when we considered corporate governance, we found that both groups of CEOs reduced social performance, and that good governance mitigated the adverse effects of the two periods on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). Specifically, we tested board independence, board frequency, CEO duality, and board diversity, and found that, for all but board independence, the negative effects of the two periods on social performance were decreased.


2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 235-273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sergio Canavati

Purpose Empirical studies provide conflicting conclusions regarding the corporate social performance (CSP) of family firms. The purpose of this paper is to synthesize the existing empirical evidence and examine the potential role of research design and contextual factors. Design/methodology/approach A meta-analysis of existing empirical studies was performed to examine the role of sampling, measurement and contextual factors in explaining the different and often conflicting results of empirical studies in the family business literature. Findings The overall relationship between family firms and CSP is positive. The relationship between family firms and CSP is positive for private family firms but is negative for public family firms. The relationship between family firms and CSP is positive when family involvement includes both family ownership and management as opposed to only family ownership or family management. Private family firms care more and public family firms care less about the community, environment, and employees than private and public nonfamily firms. The relationship between family firms and CSP is stronger in institutional environments with weak labor and corporate governance regulatory frameworks. Research limitations/implications The operationalization of both the family firm and CSP constructs significantly predicts the magnitude and direction of the relationship between family firms and CSP. Practical implications Family firms should become more skilled at measuring and disseminating information about the firm’s CSP. Family firms should work to improve public perceptions about the CSP of family firms. Social implications Policy should encourage family firms to remain privately owned by the family. Policy should also incentivize the involvement of family owners in the management of family firms. Originality/value Although several literature reviews address the relationship between family firms and CSP, this is the first review to use the meta-analysis method. The authors contribute to the family business literature by analyzing how differences in study-, firm- and country-level factors can explain some of the variance in the results of the studies in the literature.


2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-44
Author(s):  
Doocheol Moon ◽  
Seungwha Chung ◽  
Hyunjung Choi

2001 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 42-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brett A. Stone

The first iteration of a nonstatic special-purpose taxonomy of corporate social performance concepts is developed from a mailed, self-administered survey completed by managers of U.S. socially responsible mutual funds. The study combines the traditionally disparate research areas of Corporate Social Performance and Socially Responsible Investing. As a partial update of Rockness and Williams (1988), a descriptive account is presented of what mutual fund managers regard as the social issues that constitute corporate social performance. The resulting taxonomy represents an empirically derived framework useful in considering social accounting in general and accounting standard setting in particular.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document