 "CSR can add to a company's bottom line: A report")
A new study has identified three common factors that ensure corporate social responsibility (CSR) adds to a company’s bottom line. CSR has become a strategic part of most businesses and is used by companies to advance some social good and also allows them to enhance their organisational performance. Most organisations are integrating social and environmental issues into their core strategies. But can organisations do well while doing good?
To answer this, academics reviewed 163 research papers from top-tier journals published from 2000 to 2014 on the link between CSR and company performance.
In ‘A review of the nonmarket strategy literature: Toward a multi-theoretical integration’ published in the Journal of Management, Kemal Mellahi (of Warwick Business School), Jedrzej Frynas (of Middlesex University), Pei Sun (of Fudan University) and Donald Siegel (of University at Albany SUNY), argue the proper use of CSR can improve a company’s performance and so ensure that by doing good they also do well.
Prof Kemal Mellahi said, “It is clear that the results are far from consistent. A lot of firms have not found the sweet spot of doing well while doing good at the same time. More than one third of CSR studies did not find a positive relationship between CSR and performance. Several studies found that CSR actually has a negative impact on performance. But some interesting trends can be observed.”
The study identified three factors that moderate the impact of CSR on performance.
First, in order for CSR to pay-off, the organisation must be able to adapt and align its CSR activities with the concerns of key stakeholders. It must have the capacity to influence stakeholders by having the ability to ‘identify, act on, and profit from opportunities to improve stakeholder relationships’.
Secondly, communicating a company’s CSR activity is another important factor. Prof Mellahi added, “The visibility of CSR is very important. While managers are right to worry about self-promoting and publicising their CSR activities as they can be seen as ‘goodwashing’ or ‘greenwashing’, they need to be transparent about what they are doing, where the investment is going and the impact it’s having.”
The third factor is that the CSR must be consistent with what the organisation does, it needs to be committed to CSR. According to Prof Kemal Mellahi, CSR may backfire if the firm is accused of hypocrisy, where it boasts about its CSR achievements in one area while acting irresponsibly in another.
The study also highlights the potential negative impact of CSR initiatives when they are driven primarily by a manager’s ego or personal concerns. Business leaders who engage in CSR activities to boost their personal reputation and advance their personal career may hurt the bottom line.
“If an organisation’s CSR is just an indulgence of the CEO then it produces a negative effect on performance. Managers are most likely to support and be loyal to social or political stakeholders to which they are most closely tied and so devise their CSR around them. This is not good for the organisation’s performance though and can alienate other stakeholders,” said Prof Mellahi.
He added, “When managers are driven by self-serving motives they tend to spend an exceedingly large amount of resources on initiatives without a clear strategy or visible results.”
To answer this, academics reviewed 163 research papers from top-tier journals published from 2000 to 2014 on the link between CSR and company performance.
In ‘A review of the nonmarket strategy literature: Toward a multi-theoretical integration’ published in the Journal of Management, Kemal Mellahi (of Warwick Business School), Jedrzej Frynas (of Middlesex University), Pei Sun (of Fudan University) and Donald Siegel (of University at Albany SUNY), argue the proper use of CSR can improve a company’s performance and so ensure that by doing good they also do well.
Prof Kemal Mellahi said, “It is clear that the results are far from consistent. A lot of firms have not found the sweet spot of doing well while doing good at the same time. More than one third of CSR studies did not find a positive relationship between CSR and performance. Several studies found that CSR actually has a negative impact on performance. But some interesting trends can be observed.”
The study identified three factors that moderate the impact of CSR on performance.
First, in order for CSR to pay-off, the organisation must be able to adapt and align its CSR activities with the concerns of key stakeholders. It must have the capacity to influence stakeholders by having the ability to ‘identify, act on, and profit from opportunities to improve stakeholder relationships’.
Secondly, communicating a company’s CSR activity is another important factor. Prof Mellahi added, “The visibility of CSR is very important. While managers are right to worry about self-promoting and publicising their CSR activities as they can be seen as ‘goodwashing’ or ‘greenwashing’, they need to be transparent about what they are doing, where the investment is going and the impact it’s having.”
The third factor is that the CSR must be consistent with what the organisation does, it needs to be committed to CSR. According to Prof Kemal Mellahi, CSR may backfire if the firm is accused of hypocrisy, where it boasts about its CSR achievements in one area while acting irresponsibly in another.
The study also highlights the potential negative impact of CSR initiatives when they are driven primarily by a manager’s ego or personal concerns. Business leaders who engage in CSR activities to boost their personal reputation and advance their personal career may hurt the bottom line.
“If an organisation’s CSR is just an indulgence of the CEO then it produces a negative effect on performance. Managers are most likely to support and be loyal to social or political stakeholders to which they are most closely tied and so devise their CSR around them. This is not good for the organisation’s performance though and can alienate other stakeholders,” said Prof Mellahi.
He added, “When managers are driven by self-serving motives they tend to spend an exceedingly large amount of resources on initiatives without a clear strategy or visible results.”
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
SAVE 25%
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Subscribe
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors
Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share
Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor
Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements
Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
SAVE 25%