2022
DOI: 10.1002/csr.2417
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The firm under the spotlight: How stakeholder scrutiny shapes corporate social responsibility and its influence on performance

Abstract: Since stakeholders cannot directly observe corporate social responsibility (CSR) efforts, companies attempt to back up their increasing sustainability claims by sending CSR signals. The environment in which signaling takes place influences the credibility of the signals. Among the factors that make up the signaling environment, the overall exposure of the company to different stakeholders (i.e., stakeholder scrutiny) has been neglected by the literature. Using signaling and stakeholder theories, we argue how s… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
2
0
3

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 130 publications
1
2
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…The main methodological difference of our paper with the scarce existing literature, beyond the size and detail of our sample, is that we use an exogenous measure of NGO pressure, attack intensity by sector, whereas Murillo-Luna et al (2008) and Helmig et al (2016) exploit company self-reports on their perception of NGO pressure. As for Forcadell et al (2022), whose study concerns a sample of nearly 5800 firms in 23 countries, by measuring the pressure of NGOs by their number per country, without any indicator of their activity, they find, as we do, a positive effect on CSR along its three dimensions.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 65%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The main methodological difference of our paper with the scarce existing literature, beyond the size and detail of our sample, is that we use an exogenous measure of NGO pressure, attack intensity by sector, whereas Murillo-Luna et al (2008) and Helmig et al (2016) exploit company self-reports on their perception of NGO pressure. As for Forcadell et al (2022), whose study concerns a sample of nearly 5800 firms in 23 countries, by measuring the pressure of NGOs by their number per country, without any indicator of their activity, they find, as we do, a positive effect on CSR along its three dimensions.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 65%
“…We also assess the influence of NGO campaigns against large companies in the same industry, due to the threat of also being attacked as well or the increased salience of environmental issues (Baron, 2016;Baron and Diermeier, 2007). To our knowledge, these results are new and original: contrary to the existing literature (Murillo-Luna et al, 2008;Helmig et al, 2016;Forcadell et al, 2022), we are the first to highlight a visible effect of stimulation by the action of NGOs of the CSR of companies, including the smallest among them.…”
mentioning
confidence: 88%
“…31 No. 2 De este modo, los autores antes citados concuerdan en que se requiere un conocimiento más profundo sobre la naturaleza de esta relación y de sus factores influyentes, sobre el entendido de que esto contribuirá directamente en las prácticas de las empresas en cuanto a RSE, lo que va más allá de un requerimiento legal, pues impacta en la participación de los grupos de interés para afianzar la confianza (Dorobantu et al, 2018), mediante empresas que generan credibilidad (Forcadell et al, 2023) y divulgan informes de RSE de forma transparente (Koh et al, 2023).…”
Section: Revisión De La Literaturaunclassified
“…Точка зору теорії зацікавлених сторін (Freeman et al, 2010) припускає, що КСВ включає в себе управління кількома зацікавленими сторонами одночасно. У результаті КСВ може пом'якшити ймовірність негативних регуляторних, законодавчих або фіскальних дій (Forcadell et al, 2023;Sang & Han, 2023).…”
Section: вісник сумського національного аграрного університетуunclassified