Abstract

During several decades corporate social responsibility (CSR) has passed a long way from the theoretical concept of several scientists and entrepreneurs to the integrative part of the activity of the large business. Being a contemporary and innovative strategy CSR has already recommended itself as an effective tool for the positive overall perception of the company by stakeholders and consumers. However, the direct economic impact of CSR e.g. its relationship with corporate financial performance still remains unclear. Thereby this article summarizes the long discussion about the influence of CSR on the corporate financial performance (CFP) and shows the current state of CSR in the largest companies of the Ukrainian market. The main purpose of the research is to estimate the role of corporate social responsibility in the innovative development and international diversification of the companies regarding their corporate financial performance by analyzing most relevant publications and main economic indicators of the largest national and international companies of the Ukrainian market. Consequently, the object of the study is CSR in the world and in Ukraine. The article comprises of two-part – theoretical and empirical. For the theoretical analysis literature review was performed via Google Scholar search tool by keywords connected to CSR; empirical analysis of the CSR levels in Ukrainian companies included 100 largest firms according to Top-200 Ukraine 2017. Two indicators were estimated – the presence of the information on theirs official web-pages about CSR/sustainable development programs and the presence of the annual or periodical (several years) reports about CSR/sustainable development programs. After the exclusion of 12 enterprises with state ownership and 5 without relevant information, 83 companies composed 2 study groups: #1 – TNCs and their subsidiaries, – 21 companies, and #2 – other, – 62 companies. Moving to the results literature review showed that up to date a bigger part of the evidence declares the positive CSR and CFP. However, still, some studies failed to confirm this correlation thus issues about this relationship remains partly uncertain. Nevertheless, all authors admitted that today CSR is one of the basic components of developmental strategies. The empirical study of the largest Ukrainian companies showed that levels of CSR significantly differs between TNCs with subsidiaries and national large business (p=000,5) with higher levels in the first group. That means that CSR could be considered as an integral part of innovative management and international diversification of a firm. This article highlights one of the few studies about the current state of CSR in Ukraine, emphasized the important direction of further research in the field of corporate social responsibility in Ukraine. In spite of the scientific role, the results of this research may be useful for specialists in strategic planning, CEO’s, financial managers. 

Keywords: corporate social responsibility, CSR standards, corporate financial performance, investment attractiveness, CSR in Ukraine.

JEL Classification: M140, E220.

Cite as: Fadyeyeva, V. (2019). Corporate social responsibility as the basis of innovative development of modern companies: literature review and empirical study from Ukraine. Marketing and Management of Innovations, 2, 52-61. https://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2019.2-05

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

References

1. Aupperle, K. E., Carroll, A. B., & Hatfield, J. D. (1985). An empirical examination of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and profitability. Academy of management Journal, 28(2), 446-463.
2. Benlemlih, M., & Bitar, M. (2018). Corporate social responsibility and investment efficiency. Journal of Business Ethics, 148(3), 647-671.
3. Chih, H. L., Shen, C. H., & Kang, F. C. (2008). Corporate social responsibility, investor protection, and earnings management: Some international evidence. Journal of business ethics, 79(1-2), 179-198.
4. Cohen, J., Holder-Webb, L., Nath, L., & Wood, D. (2011). Retail investors’ perceptions of the decision-usefulness of economic performance, governance, and corporate social responsibility disclosures. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 23(1), 109-129.
5. Coombs, J. E., & Gilley, K. M. (2005). Stakeholder management as a predictor of CEO compensation: Main effects and interactions with financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 26(9), 827-840.
6. El Ghoul, S., Guedhami, O., Kwok, C. C., & Mishra, D. R. (2011). Does corporate social responsibility affect the cost of capital?. Journal of Banking & Finance, 35(9), 2388-2406.
7. Elhauge, E. (2005). Sacrificing corporate profits in the public interest. NyUL Rev., 80, 733.
8. Friedman, M. (2007). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. In Corporate ethics and corporate governance (pp. 173-178). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
9. Frooman, J. (1997). Socially irresponsible and illegal behavior and shareholder wealth: A meta-analysis of event studies. Business & society, 36(3), 221-249.
10. Fryxell, G. E., & Wang, J. (1994). The Fortune corporate’ reputation’ index: Reputation for what?. Journal of management, 20(1), 1-14.
11. Garriga, E., & Mele, D. (2004). Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory. Journal of business ethics, 53(1-2), 51-71.
12. Griffin, J. J., & Mahon, J. F. (1997). The corporate social performance and corporate financial performance debate: Twenty-five years of incomparable research. Business & society, 36(1), 5-31.
13. ISO 26000 – Social responsibility. URL: https://www.iso.org/iso-26000-social-responsibility.html
14. Jac, I., & Vondrackova, M. (2017). The perception of selected aspects of investment attractiveness by businesses making investments in the Czech Republic. Economics and Management.
15. Key, S., & Popkin, S. J. (1998). Integrating ethics into the strategic management process: Doing well by doing good. Management Decision, 36(5), 331-338.
16. Knox, S., & Maklan, S. (2004). Corporate social responsibility: Moving beyond investment towards measuring outcomes. European Management Journal, 22(5), 508-516.
17. Kolk, A., & Van Tulder, R. (2010). International business, corporate social responsibility and sustainable development. International business review, 19(2), 119-125.
18. McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of management review, 26(1), 117-127.
19. Mueckenberger, U., & Jastram, S. (2010). Transnational norm-building networks and the legitimacy of corporate social responsibility standards. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(2), 223-239.
20. Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization studies, 24(3), 403-441.
21. Pohle, G., & Chapman, M. (2006). IBM’s global CEO report 2006: business model innovation matters. Strategy & Leadership, 34(5), 34-40.
22. Preston, L. E., & O’bannon, D. P. (1997). The corporate social-financial performance relationship: A typology and analysis. Business & Society, 36(4), 419-429.
23. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future. URL: http://www.un-documents.net/our-common-future.pdf
24. Review of Equator Principles: https://equator-principles.com/ep4/ 
25. Roberts, P. W., & Dowling, G. R. (2002). Corporate reputation and sustained superior financial performance. Strategic management journal, 23(12), 1077-1093.
26. Rowley, T., & Berman, S. (2000). A brand new brand of corporate social performance. Business & Society, 39(4), 397-418.
27. Simpson, W. G., & Kohers, T. (2002). The link between corporate social and financial performance: Evidence from the banking industry. Journal of business ethics, 35(2), 97-109.
28. Small and large business in provides near 80% of working places in Ukraine. URL: https://www.unian.ua/business/1728091-maliy-i-seredniy-biznes-v-ukrajini-zabezpechue-mayje-80-robochih-mists-minekonomrozvitku.html
29. The Nine Principles of the Global Compact. URL: https://www.unglobalcompact.org/system/attachments/7618/original/ Zenith.pdf?1282019232 
30. Top-200 largest Ukrainian companies 2017. URL: https://biz.censor.net.ua/resonance/3084420/200_nayiblshih_kompanyi_ ukrani_2017_roku
31. UN Principles for Responsible Investment: https://www.unpri.org/
32. United Nations Global Compact. URL: https://www.unglobalcompact.org/what-is-gc 
33. Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance–financial performance link. Strategic management journal, 18(4), 303-319.
34. World Bank IFC’s Environmental and Social Standards: https://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/Topics_Ext_Content/IFC_External_Corporate_Site/Sustainability-At-IFC/Policies-Standards/Performance-Standards
35. Zadek, S., & Raynard, P. (2002). Stakeholder engagement: measuring and communicating quality. Accountability Quarterly, 19(2), 8-17.