Sustainability and CSR Trends: An Empirical Analysis

Sustainability and Corporate Social Responsibility Trends: An Empirical Analysis of Drivers and Success Measures for Multi-National Corporations In the Information and Communications Technology Industry : 

Sustainability and Corporate Social Responsibility Trends: An Empirical Analysis of Drivers and Success Measures for Multi-National Corporations In the Information and Communications Technology Industry Marianne Fortuna, Deborah Hazzard-Robinson, Joe Krupka and Dr. Karen Loch Georgia State University 7th International Conference on Environmental, Cultural, Economic and Social Sustainability: January 5-7, 2011, University of Waikato, Hamilton, NEW ZEALAND

Introduction : 

Introduction Social responsibilities of the organization have been debated for years. Nature of the social contract appears to be changing. Value judgment is being made that a good organization is synonymous with one that engages in sustainability and corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives (all other things notwithstanding).

Social Contract Theory : 

Social Contract Theory Different dynamic social pressures are influencing organizations to develop and implement sustainability and CSR programs. Donaldson (1982) considered the business and society relationship from the social contract tradition, mainly from the philosophical thought of Locke. He assumed that a sort of implicit social contract between business and society exists. Donaldson and Dunfee (2002) extended this approach and proposed an ‘‘Integrative Social Contract Theory’’ (ISCT) in order to take into account the socio-cultural context and also to integrate definitive and normative aspects of management. “In our view, as social contracts change, so too do the challenges for business. The ethical ‘‘game’’ of business today is played by different rules and harbors different penalties and benefits than it did decades ago. Broad shifts of moral consensus have occurred. In subtle, far-reaching shifts, managers and members of the general public have gradually redefined their view of the underlying responsibilities of large corporations. Half a century ago, companies were basically expected to focus on producing goods and services at reasonable prices; today, corporations are held responsible for a variety of issues involving fairness and quality of life.” Donaldson, T. 1982. Corporations and Morality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Donaldson, T., Dunfee, T.W., 2002. Ties that bind in business ethics: Social contracts and why they matter, Journal of Banking and Finance. 26 (9), pp. 1853-1865.

Literature Review : 

Literature Review Themes in Sustainability and CSR Literature Sustainability and CSR trends: Fombrun, C. and Shanley, M. 1990. What’s in a Name? Reputation Building and Corporate Strategy. Academy of Management Journal. 33 (2), pp. 233-258. Jackson, P. and Hawker, B. 2001. Is Corporate Social Responsibility Here to Stay? www.dcforum.com/research/icsrhts.doc. Henderson, David. 2009. Misguided Corporate Virtue: The Case Against Corporate Social Responsibility, and the True Role of Business Today. Economic Affairs. 29 (4), pp. 11-15. Evolving definition of CSR: Carroll, A. 1999. Corporate Social Responsibility- Evolution of a Definitional Construction. Business and Society. 38 (3), pp. 268-295. Van Marrewijk, M. 2003. Concepts and definitions of CSR and Corporate Sustainability: Between Agency and Communion. Journal of Business Ethics. 44 (2-3), pp. 95-105. Dahlsrud, Alexander. 2008. How Corporate Social Responsibility is Defined: an Analysis of 37 Definitions. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. 15 (1), pp. 1-13.

Literature Review : 

Literature Review Organizational Drivers, Success Measures & Competitiveness: McWilliams, A. and Siegel, D. 2001. Corporate Social Responsibility: A Theory of the Firm Perspective. Academy of Management Review. 25 (1), pp. 117-127. McWilliams, A., Siegel, D. and Wright, P. 2006. Corporate Social Responsibility: Strategic Implications. Journal of Management Studies. 43 (1), pp. 1-18. Williams, J. and Laroque, S. 2009. Calculating a Sustainable Return on Investment. Journal of Public Works and Infrastructure. 2 (2), pp. 94-105. Lueneburger, C. and Goleman, D. 2010. The Change Leadership Sustainability Demands. MIT Sloan Management Review. 51 (4), pp. 1-7. Reporting Frameworks [Triple Bottom Line (tbl), Connected Reporting Framework (CRF)]: Dow Jones Sustainability Index / SAM. 2010. www.sustainability-index.com. Global 100 Most Sustainable Corporations in the World. 2010. www.global100.org. Global Reporting Initiative. 2010. www.globalreporting.org. Prince of Wales Accounting for Sustainability Project. 2010. www.accountingforsustainability.org. Three Insights of Literature Review: Relevancy of the topic Ongoing debate remains Lack of empirical studies

Research Questions : 

Research Questions RQ – How do sustainability and CSR trends impact multinational corporations (MNCs) in the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) industry? RQ 1a – What are the organizational drivers in response to these trends? RQ 1b - How are the organizations measuring success of their initiatives?

Methodology : 

Methodology Data sites: Two MNCs in the ICT industry: one European; one U.S. Qualitative study: In-depth interviews of individuals with primary and non-primary responsibility for sustainability and CSR Interview instrument: Semi-structured

Interview Demographics : 

Interview Demographics

Findings : 

Findings Company A = Services Organization (US) Sustainability/CSR department established in 2009 Initiatives: 70% Social; 30% Environmental Company B = Manufacturing Organization (EU) Sustainability/CSR division established in early 1990s Initiatives: 20% Social; 80% Environmental

Drivers : 

Drivers Company A (US Company) Brand Reputation Competitiveness Community Perception Stakeholder Relationships Environmental Regulatory Company B (EU Company) Brand Reputation Environmental Competitiveness Regulatory Community Perception Stakeholder Relationships

Measurements : 

Measurements Economic (profit) Environmental (planet) Social (people) Recognition and awards Equifocal contribution Signature logo

Limitations and Future Research : 

Limitations and Future Research Limitations: Case study of two organizations in the same industry Only two geographic regions - U.S. and European MNCs Future research: Cross industry and cross cultural empirical studies Multi-level studies within organization Surveys would provide larger data sets to study across industries and across cultures Studies examining placement of organizations on value chain and their response to sustainability and CSR trends

Contacts : 

Contacts For further information or questions, contact: Marianne Fortuna mariannefortuna@gmail.com Dr. Karen D. Loch kloch@gsu.edu