Corporate Social Responsibility in Nigeria

Amaeshi, Kenneth; Adi, Bongo; Ogbechie, Chris; Amao, Olufemi

doi:10.9774/gleaf.4700.2006.wi.00009

Cited by 195 publications

(92 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Methodologies used. When we consider the types of methodologies employed in this literature, we note that, in contrast to the results of Aguinis and Glavas's review (2012) where qualitative methodologies were infrequently used (only 11%), our review suggests that these methodologies are more popular in this body of empirical research (37% qualitative); with a tendency to engage multiple stakeholders (Amaeshi et al 2006;Belal and Roberts 2010;Yin et al 2013) and multiple methods: interviews (Duarte 2010;Eweje 2006;Jamali and Mirshak 2007); focus groups (Adegbite and Nakajima 2011;Lund-Thomsen 2008); and secondary reports (Baskin 2006;Gao 2011;Thompson and Zakaria 2004). Furthermore, language presents a particularly challenging methodological consideration, given that English is the predominant language for scholarship and publication.…”

Section: Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 65%

“…This category reflects researchers' tendency to write about CSR antecedents not as neutral or disembodied factors, but rather as situated within complex geographical and political spaces. For example, Amaeshi et al (2006), focusing on the geopolitical past, describe the emergence of today's Nigerian CSR practices within the context of British colonial imperialism. They detail the end of the slave trade as ushering in the first generation of Nigerian firms, with a turn towards philanthropy, aimed at addressing the resultant socio-economic challenges.…”

Section: Institutional Level Of Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Corporate Social Responsibility in Developing Countries as an Emerging Field of Study

Jamali

Karam

2016

Int J Management Reviews

632

580

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Given the rising interest in corporate social responsibility (CSR) globally, its local expressions are as varied as they are increasingly visible in both developed and developing countries. This paper presents a multilevel review of the literature on CSR in developing countries and highlights the key differentiators and nuanced CSR-related considerations that qualify it as a distinctive field of study. This review entails a content analysis of 452 articles spanning two-and-a-half decades . Based on this comprehensive review, the authors identify the key differentiating attributes of the literature on CSR in developing countries in relation to depictions of how CSR is conceived or 'CSR Thinking' and depictions of how CSR is practiced and implemented or 'CSR Doing'. The authors synthesize from there five key themes that capture the main aspects of variation in this literature, namely: (1) complex institutional antecedents within the national business system (NBS); (2) complex macro-level antecedents outside the NBS; (3) the salience of multiple actors involved in formal and informal governance; (4) hybridized and other nuanced forms of CSR expressions; and (5) varied scope of developmental and detrimental CSR consequences. The paper concludes by accentuating how the nuanced forms of CSR in the developing world are invariably contextualized and locally shaped by multi-level factors and actors embedded within wider formal and informal governance systems.

show abstract

Section: Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 65%

Section: Institutional Level Of Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Corporate Social Responsibility in Developing Countries as an Emerging Field of Study

Jamali

Karam

2016

Int J Management Reviews

632

580

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other authors have also decimated management type into 13 forms: management values (Jansson, Nilsson, Modig, & Hed Vall, 2017), style of governance (Turel, Liu, & Bart, 2017), structure of management (Eisenberg, 2017), powers of managers (Rodríguez Bolívar, Garde Sánchez, & López Hernández, 2015), international experience (Osagie, Wesselink, Blok, Lans, & Mulder, 2016), dynamic capabilities of managers (Torugsa, O'Donohue, & Hecker, 2013), characteristics of chief executive officer (Faccio, Marchica, & Mura, 2016), management beliefs (Mayo, Gomez-Mejia, Firfiray, Berrone, & Villena, 2016), executive attitude (Bebbington, Larrinaga, & Moneva, 2008), type of directors, the ability of managers, and commitment (Abugre & Nyuur, 2015). Public pressure (Pedersen & Neergaard, 2016), media influence (Garcia-Sanchez, Cuadrado-Ballesteros, & Sepulveda, 2014), industry/institutional pressure (Luo, Wang, & Zhang, 2017), stakeholder's priority (Boesso, Favotto, & Michelon, 2015), and internationalization (Amaeshi, Adi, Ogbechie, & Amao, 2006). However, Karaibrahimoğlu (2010) argued that international financial crisis (contextual factor) can push organizations into undertaking societal responsive initiatives as business strategy.…”

Section: Determinants Of Csrmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of the business case for corporate social responsibility and firm performance

Kong

Antwi-Adjei

Bawuah

2019

Corp Soc Responsibility Env

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The outcome of existing studies on the influence of corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives on firm performance remains inconclusive though several studies to amplify the impact of CSR activities are well documented. We conducted an extensive review to detect if there are conceivable methodological errors, societal performance, and corporate performance. The analysis reveals a clearer understanding of the relationship between business performance and CSR effect. Our results attest to the inconclusiveness of CSR and firm performance shown by other scholars. An objective selection criterion was used in selecting the papers reviewed as a result of the inconsistencies associated with the methodologies of some previous studies. These inconsistencies can actually affect how firms can really internalize CSR activities so as to be able to take advantage of it. The authors also recommend future studies on the study of business case for CSR and its determinants.

show abstract

“…Differences have also been attributed to institutional conditions, for example, philanthropy has been proposed to be more important in developing countries that lack a well-developed welfare state (Amaeshi et al 2006). Visser (2006) also argues that in developing nations such as Africa, economic responsibilities will still be primary due to the high demand for foreign direct investment and jobs.…”

Section: Empirical Research On the Carroll's Four Responsibilities Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

A reconstruction of Carroll’s pyramid of corporate social responsibility for the 21st century

Baden

2016

Int J Corporate Soc Responsibility

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As one of the most influential models of corporate social responsibility (CSR), Carroll's pyramid of CSR has both reflected, and helped to perpetuate, a business-centric notion of CSR which implies that economic responsibilities take precedence over legal and ethical responsibilities. This paper argues that this conception of CSR needs updating to reflect the increased power of business in society. An empirical survey of 400 respondents from both business and non-business backgrounds indicated that current conceptions of the relative importance of business responsibilities differ greatly from Carroll's rankings. Based on the empirical research and conceptual arguments, a revised CSR pyramid is proposed with responsibilities ranked as follows: ethical, legal, economic and philanthropic.

show abstract

Corporate Social Responsibility in Nigeria

Cited by 195 publications

References 0 publications

Corporate Social Responsibility in Developing Countries as an Emerging Field of Study

Corporate Social Responsibility in Developing Countries as an Emerging Field of Study

A systematic review of the business case for corporate social responsibility and firm performance

A reconstruction of Carroll’s pyramid of corporate social responsibility for the 21st century

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About