Reaching an Optimally Distinctive CSR Strategy: Examining the Antecedents of CSR Scope Conformity and Emphasis Differentiation Among Chinese Publicly Listed Companies

Abstract

Building on recent developments in optimal distinctiveness (OD) research, we identify two dimensions of corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices – CSR scope conformity and CSR emphasis differentiation – and examine the antecedents of both. We theorize that private ownership and enhanced media coverage may increase scope conformity and emphasis differentiation, while such effects may be contingent on industrial context. In socially contested industries, the impact of private ownership on scope conformity will be mitigated, and the impact of media coverage on scope conformity will be amplified. Meanwhile, in highly competitive industries, the impact of private ownership and media coverage on emphasis differentiation will be mitigated. We test our predictions using a database of 942 Chinese publicly listed firms between 2008 and 2016. Our findings imply that the choice of optimal CSR strategy has to be made in accordance with the embedding context. The multidimensionality view of OD enables firms to better orchestrate firms’ strategic positioning along different dimensions of complex practices, which leads to better customization of societal expectations and the industrial competitive landscape.

The effect of prosocial orientation on CSR scope: the moderating role of the CSR department

“…Even though recent studies have acknowledged the importance of looking at the role of CSR scope on the firm performance (Turner et al , 2021; Salazar et al , 2012; Zhang et al , 2020), we know very little about the determinants of CSR scope. At the same time, current literature on CSR scope has mostly paid attention on the external factors such as the relationship with the firm’s stakeholders, competitors’ CSR scope and industry characteristics (Perez-Batres et al , 2012; Zhang et al , 2022). This study addresses the call for exploring the firm’s internal factors of CSR scope, such as a firm’s prosocial orientation and the existence of CSR department inside of the firm.…”

“…Perez-Batres et al (2012) found that CSR scope can be influenced by the type or intensity of stakeholder pressure as firms react differently to various stakeholder pressures. Further, Zhang et al (2022) found that a firm’s ownership structure, media coverage, and the industrial context can influence the scope of CSR. Despite the increase in studies of antecedents, several scholars highlight the lack of attention to factors that influence the decision-making of CSR scope (Turner et al , 2021; Zhang et al , 2020).…”

“…The majority of existing research tends to examine CSR in the aggregate or in a selected number of dimensions. Further, the current literature on CSR scope has focused primarily on external factors such as a firm's relationship with its stakeholders, the scope of its competitors, and the characteristics of its industry (Perez-Batres et al, 2012;Zhang et al, 2022). However, this falls shorts of understanding a firm's integrative decision-making process, including the firm's response to (and balance of) the complex, interconnected, and occasionally conflicting stakeholder demands (Crane, 2020;Freeman et al, 2010;Griffin et al, 2021;Harrison and Freeman, 1999;Kujala et al, 2022).…”

Sustainable value creation in multinational enterprises: The role of corporate governance actors

“…For example, recent research in optimal distinctiveness in firm strategy has highlighted that firms may vary in their corporate social responsibility emphasis (Zhang, Zhou, & Lyles, 2023). If owners vary in their matching and governance competences, i.e., in terms of what to own and how to own (Foss et al, 2021), does such variation entail differences in terms of focus or emphasis in corporate sustainability policies, and subsequent social and environmental performance?…”