Market Orientation, Corporate Social Responsibility, and Business Performance

Brik, Anis Ben; Rettab, Belaid; Mellahi, Kamel

doi:10.1007/s10551-010-0658-z

Cited by 167 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 101 publications

(120 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A multifaceted approach to prosocial activity contributes to the fact that in an organisation's analysis an abandonment of perceiving it as a source of benefits for investors, earnings for employees and products for consumers takes place, and then there is a shift to an organisation's analysis as corresponding to social and environmental needs and values (Adamus-Matuszyńska, 2013;Hediger, 2010). Concrete social obligations are contained in basic social requirements and in qualitative programmes of an organisation (Brik, Rettab & Mellahi, 2011;Maignan & Ferrell, 2004;Pratley, 1995): towards broadly understood expectations of customers, towards a society in use of environmental resources area, towards the employed in terms of ensuring adequate working conditions. The objectives implemented within the framework of qualitative programmes incorporate ,in the author's opinion, apart from basic quality requirements also preventing unnecessary damage, improving operational processes and building durable partnership with stakeholders.…”

Section: Review Of Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Prosocial Orientation of an Organisation: The Preliminary Identification of Evaluation Criteria

Adamska-Chudzińska¹

2016

MOS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prosocial orientation of an organisation consists in such organising of an activity, in which universal social values are taken on as valuation criteria and evaluations of economic activities. In this case, a social dimension of economic activities constitutes an important aspect of implementation of a strategy and improving competitiveness of an organisation. Practical solutions including social aspects in an organisation's activity are not satisfactory enough. Organisations do not have sufficient determinants for developing prosocial orientation facilitating economic rationality. The aim of the article is to present major signs of prosocial activity of an organisation and exemplification research verifying those activities as determining and evaluating factors of a degree of prosocial orientation in an organisation's activity. On the basis of a review of the literature from the field of taking socially responsible actions by an organisation, an author's classification of prosocial actions has been formulated. Four areas of such actions have been distinguished i.e.: 1. reliable implementation of qualitative requirements, 2. improvement of activities through elimination of losses, 3. axiological orientation of managers' attitudes, 4. subjective treatment of employees.The method and results of research verifying presence of indicated activities in functioning of an exemplary organisation with market leadership in its sector have been presented. A high degree of prosocial involvement in the examined organisation and the relation between presented types of activities and general state of prosocial engagement have been stated. "A participation" of the areas selected to examination has been initially confirmed as really examining the prosocial orientation of an organisation. Thus, an initial justification for formulating overall evaluation of prosocial involvement on their basis has been obtained. A dominant role of subjective treatment of employees in development of analysed phenomenon and in taking all kinds of socially responsible actions has also been confirmed.

show abstract

Section: Review Of Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Prosocial Orientation of an Organisation: The Preliminary Identification of Evaluation Criteria

Adamska-Chudzińska¹

2016

MOS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, many researchers have identified a number of variables believed to impact how a firm's social performance relates to its financial performance (Andersen & Dejoy, 2011). Callan and Thomas (2009) found that control variables must be properly specified to avoid bias and that some measures are related to CFP.…”

Section: Different Control Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The first category is based on consumers, which mostly relate with product quality, diversity, product safety, quality of services, innovativeness, alcohol, tobacco, gambling and nuclear power (Preston, O'Bannon, 1997; Mahoney, Roberts, 2007;Moore, 2001, etc.). The second category is based on government, community or military, such as governments, community investment, community relations, community and society, defense/weapons, military contracting ( Brik, Rettab, Mellahi, 2011;Andersen and Dejoy, 2011;Surroca, Tribo, 2005;Fauzi, 2009;Baron, Harjoto and Hoje Jo, 2011,et.). The third category is based on employee, such as employees, human right, labor relations, ability to attract\develop and keep talented people (Fauzi et al 2007;Laan et al 2008;Waddock and Graves, 1997, et.).…”

Section: Various Stakeholder Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The third category is based on employee, such as employees, human right, labor relations, ability to attract\develop and keep talented people (Fauzi et al 2007;Laan et al 2008;Waddock and Graves, 1997, et.). The fourth type is based on shareholder or investor (Moore, 2001;Brik et al, 2011;Laan et al 2008;May, Khare, 2008). The fifth type is based on internal management or governance, such as governance, quality of management, wise use of corporate assets, ownership in other companies, South Africa investments, financial soundness, on-U.S. operations (Peter and Sarah, 1998;Andersen and Dejoy, 2011;Fauzi and Mahoney, Rahman, 2007;May and Khare, 2008;Anderson and Olsen, 2011;Nelling and Webb, 2009, et.).…”

Section: Various Stakeholder Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The fourth type is based on shareholder or investor (Moore, 2001;Brik et al, 2011;Laan et al 2008;May, Khare, 2008). The fifth type is based on internal management or governance, such as governance, quality of management, wise use of corporate assets, ownership in other companies, South Africa investments, financial soundness, on-U.S. operations (Peter and Sarah, 1998;Andersen and Dejoy, 2011;Fauzi and Mahoney, Rahman, 2007;May and Khare, 2008;Anderson and Olsen, 2011;Nelling and Webb, 2009, et.). The sixth is based on society and environment, including responsibility to the community and the environment, natural environment, philanthropic donation, NGOs, contribution to society (Mishra, Suar, 2010;Clyde, Hull and Rothenberg, 2011;Surroca, Tribo and Waddock, 2010;Brammer and Millington, 2008, et.).…”

Section: Various Stakeholder Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

On the Reasons for the Vexing CSP-CFP Relationship: Methodology, Control Variables, Stakeholder Groups, and Measures. The Review of 63 Studies from 1990s

Fu¹,

Jia²

2012

IJBM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prior studies on the relationship between corporate social performance and corporate financial performance are inconclusive. In the paper, we review 63 studies, and find (1) there are three methodology, which are empirical analysis, normative analysis and meta-analysis; (2) control variables, such as industry, size and risk, have been playing the important role in these studies; (3) different researchers discuss different stakeholder groups; (4) measures of both CSP and CFP are the complex phenomenon, and still uncertain. We assert that the variations of methodology, industries, control variables, stakeholder groups, and measures of both CSP and CFP should be responsible for the vexing relationship.

show abstract

Cooperatives’ Organizational Restructuring, Strategic Attributes, and Performance: The Case of Agribusiness Cooperatives in Greece

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We develop a classification of traditional versus restructured cooperative organizational attributes based on an inductive approach. Using this classification and integrating concepts from the business literature (i.e., market and brand orientation), we hypothesize three types of relationships: (a) the influence of organizational attributes, i.e., ownership, control and cost/benefit allocation, on organizational performance; (b) the influence of strategic, i.e., market and brand orientation, attributes on organizational performance, and (c) the influence of organizational attributes on market orientation. We examine these relationships empirically in two studies. In study 1, using data from 114 agribusiness cooperatives, we demonstrate that strategic attributes have a greater influence on organizational performance than organizational attributes. In study 2, we replicate the design from study 1, i.e., tracking attribute scores over time, with a subsample of 25 cooperatives 4 years later. This second study generally confirms the findings of study 1. Taken together, the results suggest that greater emphasis should be placed on strategic attributes both in the literature and in practice. C 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

show abstract

Market Orientation, Corporate Social Responsibility, and Business Performance

Abstract: market orientation, corporate social responsibility, resource-based view, Dubai, emerging economies,

Cited by 167 publications

References 101 publications

Prosocial Orientation of an Organisation: The Preliminary Identification of Evaluation Criteria

Prosocial Orientation of an Organisation: The Preliminary Identification of Evaluation Criteria

On the Reasons for the Vexing CSP-CFP Relationship: Methodology, Control Variables, Stakeholder Groups, and Measures. The Review of 63 Studies from 1990s

Cooperatives’ Organizational Restructuring, Strategic Attributes, and Performance: The Case of Agribusiness Cooperatives in Greece

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About