Zoekresultaten

The role of governance in corporate social responsibility

This article extends the corporate social performance (CSP) model by studying the role of governance structures and governance systems in shaping corporate social responsibility. The authors argue that a governance perspective offers a fruitful research strategy both to study empirically how firms balance the competing moral frameworks and political philosophies that are part and parcel of defining their role in society and to further the theoretical integration of the descriptive and normative perspectives in the business and society field. They illustrate the potential of this research strategy with a comparative case study of processes of responsiveness at four Dutch banks with markedly different governance structures. This study shows how governance systems and structures both enable and constrain corporate responsibility and responsiveness. The authors conclude with a proposal to reorient the CSP model to harness the integrative potential of studying corporate social responsibility through a governance lens.

The role of governance in corporate social responsibility

This article extends the corporate social performance (CSP) model by studying the role of governance structures and governance systems in shaping corporate social responsibility. The authors argue that a governance perspective offers a fruitful research strategy both to study empirically how firms balance the competing moral frameworks and political philosophies that are part and parcel of defining their role in society and to further the theoretical integration of the descriptive and normative perspectives in the business and society field. They illustrate the potential of this research strategy with a comparative case study of processes of responsiveness at four Dutch banks with markedly different governance structures. This study shows how governance systems and structures both enable and constrain corporate responsibility and responsiveness. The authors conclude with a proposal to reorient the CSP model to harness the integrative potential of studying corporate social responsibility through a governance lens.

From corporate towards 'shared' social responsibility?

Signalling responsibility? Applying signalling theory to the ISO 26000 standard for social responsibility

Many global challenges cannot be addressed by one single actor alone. Achieving sustainability requires governance by state and non-state market actors to jointly realise public values and corporate goals. As a form of public-private governance, voluntary standards involving governments, non-governmental organisations and companies have gained much traction in recent years and have been in the limelight of public authorities and policymakers. From a firm perspective, sustainability standards can be a way to demonstrate that they engage in corporate social responsibility (CSR) in a credible way. To capitalise on their CSR activities, firms need to ensure their stakeholders are able to recognise and assess their CSR quality. However, because the relative observability of CSR is low and since CSR is a contested concept, information asymmetries in firm-stakeholder relationships arise. Adopting CSR standards and using these as signalling devices is a strategy for firms to reduce these information asymmetries, by revealing their true CSR quality. Against this background, this article investigates the voluntary ISO 26000 standard for social responsibility as a form of public-private governance and contends that, despite its objectives, this standard suffers from severe signalling problems. Applying signalling theory to the ISO 26000 standard, this article takes a critical stance towards this standard and argues that firms adhering to this standard may actually emit signals that compromise rather than enhance stakeholders' ability to identify and interpret firms' underlying CSR quality. Consequently, the article discusses the findings in the context of public-private governance, suggests a specification of signalling theory and identifies avenues for future research.

Challenges in corporate social responsibility reporting and the promotion of good corporate citizenship through external assurance

In dit artikel worden de posities van verschillende actoren, die actief zijn op het gebied van maatschappelijk verantwoord ondernemen en assurance, geïdentificeerd en geanalyseerd. De nadruk wordt momenteel gelegd op vrijwillige activiteiten op het gebied van maatschappelijk verantwoord ondernemen en het rapporteren over deze activiteiten, ondanks dat een nieuwe richtlijn op Europees niveau bepaalde Nederlandse ondernemingen verplicht te rapporteren over maatschappelijk verantwoord ondernemen. Door het vrijwillige karakter van rapportages over maatschappelijk verantwoord ondernemen en het ontbreken van formele regelgeving is er een verhoogd risico dat bedrijven misbruik maken van mvo-rapportages voor bijvoorbeeld zakelijk of persoonlijk gewin. De verwachting is echter dat het belang en de kwaliteit van mvo-rapportages zal toenemen in de nabije toekomst om transparantie te verhogen binnen verschillende branches en sectoren. Hierdoor kunnen mvo-rapportages en de controle hierop ingezet worden om onethisch gedrag te verminderen en meer openheid van zaken te geven hoe ondernemingen te werk gaan.

Partnerships for corporate social responsability

The purpose of this paper is to conceptualise the extent to which partnerships with non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are a necessity for successful efforts of businesses in the area of corporate social responsibility (CSR). The main findings are based on an analysis of existing literature on NGO typologies and strategies for CSR and illustrated with examples from the Dutch National Research Program on CSR. Based on three different strategies towards CSR, the suggestion is that NGOs tend to become involved in partnerships with companies that have an interest in postponing concrete results, while partnerships with companies that have the potential for the biggest contribution to the ambitions of NGOs have the highest risk of diminishing NGO-legitimacy.