Résumés
Abstract
Our study examines the impact of CSR committees on corporate social performance (CSP) and the moderating effect of capitalism models on this relationship.
Using an international sample of 2,066 firm-year observations from 2011 to 2018 across 13 countries, the study employs a multi-theoretical approach combining neo-institutional theory, stakeholder theory, and resource dependence theory. CSP is measured using two approaches: process-based (Wood, 1991) and stakeholder-based (Clarkson, 1995).
Our results show that CSR committees significantly improve CSP, with a more pronounced effect in coordinated market economies (CMEs) than in liberal market economies (LMEs). This study highlights the importance of institutional factors in the effectiveness of voluntary governance mechanisms and offers implications for regulators and actors in various national contexts.
Keywords:
- Corporate social responsibility committee,
- Corporate Social Performance,
- Capitalism Models,
- Neo-institutional Theory,
- Stakeholder theory,
- Resource dependence theory
Résumé
Notre étude examine l’impact des comités RSE sur la performance sociale des entreprises (PSE), ainsi que l’effet modérateur des modèles de capitalisme sur cette relation.
En mobilisant un échantillon international de 2 066 observations « entreprise-année » entre 2011 et 2018, couvrant 13 pays, l’étude adopte une approche pluraliste combinant la théorie néo-institutionnelle, la théorie des parties prenantes et la théorie de la dépendance aux ressources. La PSE est évaluée selon une double approche fondée sur les processus (Wood, 1991) et les parties prenantes (Clarkson, 1995).
Nos résultats montrent que les comités RSE améliorent significativement la PSE, avec un effet plus prononcé dans les économies de marché coordonnées (CMEs) que dans les économies de marché libérales (LMEs). Cette étude met en lumière l’importance des facteurs institutionnels dans l’efficacité des mécanismes volontaires de gouvernance et offre des implications pour les régulateurs et les acteurs dans divers contextes nationaux.
Mots-clés :
- Comité de responsabilité sociétale des entreprises,
- Performance sociétale des entreprises,
- Modèles de capitalisme,
- Théorie néo-institutionnelle,
- Théorie des parties prenantes,
- Théorie de la dépendance aux ressources
Resumen
Nuestro estudio analiza el impacto de los comités de RSE en el desempeño social corporativo (DSC) y el efecto moderador de los modelos de capitalismo en esta relación.
Utilizando una muestra internacional de 2.066 observaciones empresa-año entre 2011 y 2018, en 13 países, el estudio adopta un enfoque multi-teórico que combina la teoría neo-institucional, la teoría de los stakeholders y la teoría de la dependencia de recursos. El DSC se mide a través de dos enfoques: basado en procesos (Wood, 1991) y basado en los stakeholders (Clarkson, 1995).
Nuestros resultados muestran que los comités de RSE mejoran significativamente el DSC, con un efecto más pronunciado en las economías de mercado coordinadas (CME) que en las economías de mercado liberales (LME). Este estudio destaca la importancia de los factores institucionales en la efectividad de los mecanismos de gobernanza voluntarios y ofrece implicaciones para reguladores y actores en diversos contextos nacionales.
Palabras clave:
- Comité de responsabilidad social empresarial,
- Desempeño social corporativo,
- Modelos de capitalismo,
- Teoría neo-institucional,
- Teoría de los stakeholders,
- Teoría de la dependencia de recursos
Parties annexes
Bibliography
- Aguilera, R. V., & Jackson, G. (2003). The cross-national diversity of corporate governance: Dimensions and determinants. Academy of Management Review, 28(3), 447-465. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2003.10196772
- Aguilera, R. V., & Jackson, G. (2010). Comparative and international corporate governance. The Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), 485-556. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2010.495525
- Allen, F., & Gale, D. (2000). Comparing financial systems. MIT Press.
- Amable, B. (2003). The diversity of modern capitalism. Oxford University Press.
- Amaeshi, K., & Amao, O. O. (2009). Corporate social responsibility in transnational spaces: Exploring influences of varieties of capitalism on expressions of corporate codes of conduct in Nigeria. Journal of Business Ethics, 86, 225–239. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0192-2
- Baraibar-Diez, E., Odriozola, M. D., & Fernández Sánchez, J. L. (2019). Sustainable compensation policies and its effect on environmental, social, and governance scores. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26, 1457-1472. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1745
- Baraibar-Diez, E., & Odriozola, M. D. (2019). CSR committees and their effect on ESG performance in UK, France, Germany, and Spain. Sustainability, 11(18), 5077. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11185077
- Béji, R., Yousfi, O., Loukil, N., & Omri, A. (2020). Board diversity and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 173(1), 133–155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04521-3
- Ben Larbi, S., Elage, A., & Dardour, A. (2024). CEO Incentive Pay and Corporate Social Performance: Evidence from French Companies. European Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2024.06.003
- Ben Larbi, S. (2021). La performance des systèmes de gouvernance des entreprises dans un contexte international: Approche comparative des modèles de capitalisme. Management International, 25, 186–206.
- Ben Larbi, S., Lacroux, A., & Luu, P. (2019). La performance sociétale des entreprises dans un contexte international: Vers une convergence des modèles de capitalisme? Management International, 23(2), 56–72.
- Berrone, P., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2009). Environmental performance and executive compensation: An integrated agency-institutional perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 103–126. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.36461946
- Burke, J. J., Hoitash, R., & Hoitash, U. (2019). The heterogeneity of board-level sustainability committees and corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 154, 1161-1186.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3453-3
- Cassely, L., Ben Larbi, S., Revelli, C., & Lacroux, A. (2021). Corporate social performance in time of economic crisis. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 12(5), 913–942. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-05-2020-0168
- Cassely, L., Revelli, C., Ben Larbi, S., & Lacroux, A. (2020). Sustainable development drivers of companies: An international and multilevel analysis. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(5), 2028–2043. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1943
- Cavaco, S., Crifo, P., & Guidoux, A. (2020). Corporate social responsibility and governance: The role of executive compensation. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 59(2), 240-274. https://doi.org/10.1111/irel.12256
- Chams, N., & García-Blandón, J. (2019). Sustainable or not sustainable? The role of the board of directors. Journal of Cleaner Production, 226, 1067–1081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.118
- Clarkson, M. B. E. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analysing and evaluating corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 92–117. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9503271994
- Clementino, E., & Perkins, R. (2020). How do companies respond to environmental, social and governance (ESG) ratings? Evidence from Italy. Journal of Business Ethics, 171(2), 379–397. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04441-2
- Deeg, R., & Jackson, G. (2007). Towards a more dynamic theory of capitalist variety. Socio-Economic Review, 5(1), 149–180. https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwl021
- Derchi, G.-B., Zoni, L., & Dossi, A. (2021). Corporate social responsibility performance, incentives, and learning effects. Journal of Business Ethics, 173(3), 617–641. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04528-w
- DiMaggio, P.J. & Powell, W.W. (1983). The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147-160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101
- Eberhardt-Toth, E. (2017). Who should be on a board corporate social responsibility committee?. Journal of Cleaner Production, 140, 1926-1935. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.127
- Eberhardt-Toth, E., Caby, J., Gendron, C., & Ramboarisata, L. (2019). Determinants of the presence of CSR committees within European boards of directors. Revue de l’Organisation Responsable, 14(1), 33–49.
- Elage, A., & Mard, Y. (2018). Code de gouvernance et gestion des résultats comptables: le cas des sociétés Françaises cotées. Comptabilité Contrôle Audit, 2 (Tome 24).
- Elage, A., Ben Larbi, S., & Dardour, A. (2023). Rémunération des dirigeants, structure de l’actionnariat et performance sociétale des entreprises. Revue Recherche en Sciences de Gestion- Management Sciences – Ciencias de Gestion, n° 157, 377-304.
- Elmaghrabi, M. E. (2021). CSR committee attributes and CSR performance: UK evidence. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 21(5), 892-919. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-11-2020-0500
- Francoeur, C., Melis, A., Gaia, S., & Aresu, S. (2017). Green or greed? An alternative look at CEO compensation and corporate environmental commitment. Journal of Business Ethics, 140(3), 439–445. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2679-1
- Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Times Magazine (September 13), 122–126.
- García-Sánchez, I., Gómez-Miranda, M., David, F., & Rodríguez Ariza, L. (2019). Board independence and GRI-IFC performance standards: The mediating effect of the CSR committee. Journal of Cleaner Production, 225, 554–562.
- Gómez-Mejía, L.R., Neacsu, I., & Martin, G. (2019). CEO risk-taking and socioemotional wealth: The behavioral agency model, family control and CEO option wealth. Journal of Management, 45(4), 1713–1738.
- Hall, P. A., & Soskice, D. (2001). Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/0199247757.001.0001
- Hillman, A. J., & Dalziel, T. (2003). Boards of Directors and Firm Performance: Integrating Agency and Resource Dependence Perspectives. Academy of Management Review, 28(3), 383–396. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2003.10196729
- Ho, F. N., Wang, H.-M., & Vitell, S. J. (2012). A global analysis of corporate social performance: The effects of cultural and geographic environments. Journal of Business Ethics, 107(4), 423–433.
- Hofman, P. S., Moon, J., & Wu, B. (2017). Corporate social responsibility under authoritarian capitalism: Dynamics and prospects of state-led and society-driven CSR. Business & Society, 56(5), 651–671.
- Igalens, J., Déjean, F., & El Akremi, A. (2008). L’influence des systèmes économiques sur la notation sociétale. Revue française de gestion, (3), 135-155.
- Jackson, G., & Apostolakou A. (2010). Corporate social responsibility in Western Europe: An institutional mirror or substitute? Journal of Business Ethics, 94, 371–394.
- Khan, A., Afeef, M., Ilyas, M., & Jan, S. (2023). International Evidence on the Nexus between Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Risk: Do Board Diversity and CSR Committee Matter?. Journal of Managerial Sciences, 16(3), 91-109.
- La Porta, R. L., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1998). Law and finance. Journal of political economy, 106(6), 1113-1155.
- La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. (2000). Investor protection and corporate governance. Journal of financial economics, 58(1‑2), 3-27.
- Langlois, R. N., & Foss, N. J. (1999). Capabilities and governance: The rebirth of production in the theory of economic organization. Kyklos, 52(2), 201–218.
- Martínez-Ferrero, J., Suárez-Fernández, O., & García-Sánchez, I. M. (2019). Obfuscation versus enhancement as corporate social responsibility disclosure strategies. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(2), 468–480.
- Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). “Implicit” and “Explicit” CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 404–424. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2008.31193458
- Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2020). Reflections on the 2018 decade award: The meaning and dynamics of corporate spcial responsabilities. Academy of Management Review, 45(1), 7-28.
- Meier, O., & Schier, G. (2021). CSR and family CEO: The moderating role of CEO’s age. Journal of Business Ethics, 174(3), 595–612.
- Michelon, G., & Parbonetti, A. (2012). The effect of corporate governance on sustainability disclosure. Journal of Management and Governance, 16(3), 477-509
- Orazalin, N., & Mahmood, M. (2020). Determinants of GRI-based sustainability reporting: evidence from an emerging economy. Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies, 10(1), 140-164.
- Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (2003). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. Stanford University Press.
- Petrenko, O. V., Aime, F., Ridge, J., & Hill, A. (2016). Corporate social responsibility or CEO narcissism? CSR motivations and organizational performance. Strategic Management Journal, 37(2), 262–279.
- Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). Creating shared value: How to reinvent capitalism—and unleash a wave of innovation and growth. Harvard Business Review, 89(1–2), 62–77.
- Radu, C., & Smaili, N. (2021). Alignment versus monitoring: An examination of the effect of the CSR committee and CSR-linked executive compensation on CSR performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 173, 617–641.
- Rothenberg, S., Hull, C. E., & Tang, Z. (2017). The impact of human resource management on corporate social performance strengths and concerns. Business & Society, 56(3), 391-418.
- Santoso, A. H., & Feliana, K. (2014). The association between corporate social responsibility and corporate financial performance. Issues in Social and Environmental Accounting, 8(2), 82–103.
- Tasheva, S., & Hillman, A. (2018). Integrating diversity at different levels: Multi-level human capital, social capital, and demographic diversity and their implications for team effectiveness, Academy of Management Review, 44(4), 746–765.
- Velte, P. (2020). Do CEO incentives and characteristics influence corporate social responsibility (CSR) and vice versa? A literature review. Social Responsibility Journal, 16(8), 1293-1323.
- Wang, Q., Dou, J., & Jia, S. (2015). A meta-analytic review of corporate social responsibility and corporate financial performance: The moderating effect of contextual factors. Business & Society, 55(8), 1083–1121.
- Wood, D. J. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16, 691–718.
- Wood, D. J., & Jones, R. E. (1995). Stakeholder mismatching: A theoretical problem in empirical research on corporate social performance. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 3(3), 229-267.