Search results

The chapter aims to clarify the relationship between corporate governance structure and corporate subscription to Global Compact standards. Part one of the chapter looks at the relationship between different models of board governance and active Global Compact participation by publicly listed companies. Part two of the chapter examines a number of external mechanisms aimed at bringing corporate behavior in line with Global Compact principles, and argues that there is a mutually reinforcing relationship between internal governance structures and external provisions aimed at influencing corporate behavior.

Part one of the chapter uses an independent T-test to compare the average (mean) proportion of publicly listed companies from unitary board countries with an active Global Compact Communication on Progress status with the average proportion of publicly listed companies from two-tier/hybrid corporate governance systems listed as active Global Compact participants. Part two of the chapter uses primary and secondary sources to examine external mechanisms operating across national borders aimed at influencing corporate behavior.

The chapter finds that a higher proportion of public companies from countries with two-tier/hybrid corporate governance structures have become active Global Compact participants compared to public companies from legal systems with unitary board corporate governance structures. Part two of the chapter examines the potentially mutually reinforcing relationship between internal governance structures and external mechanisms for modifying corporate behavior.

While external codes and standards such as the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises appear to be influencing corporate behavior worldwide, quantitative data confirming and recording the extent and nature of this influence (if any) remains limited.

The chapter provides useful insights for policy makers and corporate leaders into the relationship between internal corporate governance structures and external codes, standards and guidelines aimed at influencing corporate behavior.

This chapter provides original insights into whether and how internal governance structures can complement and reinforce social standards regarding global corporate citizenship, and the legal guidelines reflecting those standards.

This chapter examines roles and challenges for corporations in addressing Post 2015 world development objectives. Specifically it does review the contributions and opportunities of the principles of the Global Compact and other social responsibility initiatives for embedding corporate contribution to sustainable markets and societal development.

The results presented in this chapter are based on analysis of secondary sources and a literature review to determine conceptual and theoretical frameworks for identifying assumptions and challenges of corporate sustainability in the Post 2015 era.

It was found that although there are neither academic nor activist definitive consensuses regarding positive impacts of adopting the UN Global Compact principles for sustainability, the impacts of committed corporations, organisations and association are multiplying societal understanding of the implications in societies, governments and markets of violating human and labour rights, degrading and not protecting the environment, and having corruption.

This chapter could be used as teaching material for undergraduate and master courses of corporate social responsibility, business ethics, sustainability, operations management and strategy.

This chapter discusses firms’ responsibilities regarding world development objectives in a Post 2015 world.

To perform a detailed analysis of the inherent complexities in achieving the 9th Sustainable Development Goal (SDG), it is necessary to understand the procedures used by member states delegations to follow-up and review the progress made in implementing the SDGs and targets as mandated in the A/RES/70/1 Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on September 25, 2015 (U.N. General Assembly, 2015); best known worldwide as ‘Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development’. Hence, this chapter aims at providing an overview of sustainability reporting practices to the U.N. High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development (HLPF). It starts by reflecting on the U.N. landmark events from which the 2030 Agenda emerged and the political and cultural context prevailing at that time. Afterward, it argues on the guidance documents issued by HLPF for following up and reviewing individual countries’ progress. The most controversial issue covered in this chapter undoubtedly concerns information gathering. This issue is because stakeholders consistently question the accuracy of data being provided, not only on Voluntary National Reviews (VNRs) but also on corporate sustainability reports. Therefore, the chapter also covers the guidelines of independent external organisations such as the Global Compact Initiative (GCI) and Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) used by firms to legitimate sustainability reporting content and increase reliability. Finally, this chapter concludes with a brief description of required procedures to submit and present VNRs.

In 2014, the European Union (EU) adopted the non-financial reporting Directive (2014/95/EU) making the disclosure of certain non-financial topics mandatory for large listed companies. They are required to report on policies, actions and outcomes regarding their environmental impact, social and employee matters, impact on human rights and corruption. Denmark introduced mandatory corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting already in 2009, while Germany had no specific legislation on CSR reporting before 2017. Some authors allege that regulation positively impacts CSR reporting, while others argue that the voluntary nature of CSR reporting is essential (Romolini, Fissi, & Gori, 2014). Critics of mandatory reporting claim that non-financial reporting should develop bottom-up, as mandatory one-size-fits-all solutions are inappropriate given the differences among companies (ICC, 2015). The aim of this chapter is to evaluate the effect of legislation on reporting quality by comparing Denmark with a long tradition for mandatory reporting and Germany introducing mandatory rather recently. However, a rich body of literature exists on factors impacting CSR reporting other than legislation. These are among others: firm size, ownership structure, industrial sector and culture (Hahn & Kühnen, 2013.)

The chapter applies a content analysis of 150 CSR reports from German and Danish listed companies between 2008 and 2017 from four different industrial sectors. The chapter finds that mandatory reporting improves overall report quality by lifting the quality floor, yet, without lifting the quality ceiling. Size is important as improvements in reporting are largest in small and medium-sized companies. Companies in environmentally sensitive sectors tend to disclose more relevant environmental information than companies in less sensitive sectors. Both culture and ownership structure has a moderating effect on report quality.

This chapter discusses how businesses can create alignment between their corporate sustainability (CS) efforts that focus on the triple bottom line of the financial, environmental, and social, and the 10 principles of the UN Global Compact in the four core areas of environment, human rights, labor standards, and anticorruption.

Based on the literature review, the relationship between CS and corporate responsibility is presented. Creating alignment between CS management and Global Compact initiatives requires knowledge of the Global Reporting Initiative (G4-GRI), third-party CS rankings, green supply chain management, and anticorruption strategies.

UN Global Compact is an international forum to promote and self-report CS and corporate social responsibility [Bitanga & Bridwell, 2010. CS is achieved through a triple bottom line – financial, environmental, and social (Hutchins & Sutherland, 2008). For CS management, businesses use four strategies including defensive, cost-benefit, strategic, and innovation/learning [Buchholtz & Carroll, 2008; Egbeleke, Journal of Management and Sustainability, 4(2), 92–105 (2014); Epstein, 2008; Epstein, Buhovac, & Yuthas, 2010]. The UN G4-GRI is the most widely used comprehensive sustainability reporting standard in the world (G4-GRI, 2013). Third-party, industry sector-specific CS ratings reinforce the self-reported sustainability reports. Each firm has to conduct their own CS cost-benefit analysis to determine how CS practices can lead to value creation for sustained competitive advantage. Creating alignment with Global Compact initiatives offers firms a marketing advantage. Conducting business in accordance with the Global Compact is a value-increasing business strategy [Kaspereit & Lopatta, 2011; Lopatta & Kaspereit, 2014; Michelon, Corporate Reputation Review, 14(2), 79–96 (2011)]. Green supply chain management is essential for CS (Penfield, 2014). Four prevailing anticorruption frameworks or intervention policy approaches include law enforcement, economics, moralism, and cultural relativism (Bellows, 2013). There is little sustainability reporting in the government and public-sector organizations (Adams, Muir, & Hoque, 2014).

It is difficult to quantify the financial and social benefits of aligning the CS efforts with the 10 principles of UN Global Compact [Parisi, Journal of Management and Governance, 17(1), 71–97 (2013); Nilipour & Nilipour, Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 3(9), 1084–1092 (2012)]. The environmental impact can be easily quantified.

As the primary driver of globalization, businesses and other organizations can help ensure that markets, commerce, technology, and finance advance in ways that benefit environment, economies, and societies in both developed and developing countries leading to sustained development.

The role of green supply chain management and anticorruption strategies in CS management is explored.

Purpose – This chapter examines the corporate social responsibility (CSR) of international businesses to combat commercial and governmental corruption. The focus is on multinational enterprises (MNEs) as key business actors globally.Design/methodology/approach – The methodology of the chapter is a combination of literature review, summary of international anticorruption accords, and analysis of available data sources. The literature review is not a systematic survey of academic literature but rather citation of key works bearing on the chapter's purpose. Greater emphasis rests on anticorruption accords and data sources to provide practical guidance to business managers and public officials.Findings – Corruption is global and ubiquitous although varying markedly by country and industry. Corruption occurs in multiple forms such as bribery, entertainment, extortion, facilitating payments, favors, gifts, gratuities, and travel. International anticorruption accords now constitute a formal global norm against bribery and extortion in commercial or governmental transactions. Economic and political costs of corruption are high. Active national enforcement is gradually increasing.Practical implications – The needed corporate policy is not to pay bribes, large or small, in any form for any reason. Such policy will in future extend to prohibit even minor facilitating payments. Businesses should define and enforce broadly applied anticorruption norms. The chapter cites key examples of prosecutions and anticorruption efforts.Originality/value of chapter – This chapter marshals available information from literature, anticorruption accords, and corruption data sources. The chapter is intended to be a useful guide for business managers and public officials.

To study the values espoused by top MNEs operating in Colombia, through their vision and mission statements, in order to interpret their ethical orientation and to examine their concern toward diverse stakeholders.

Content analysis – an analytical framework was crafted from the literature review, while allowing room for emergent phenomena. Thus a combination of deduction and induction was enacted.

Most values are either teleologically oriented or grounded in deontological values, with a significant amount of values that could be related to a virtue ethics. Regarding stakeholders, narrow definitions tend to prevail.

The comparability of the vision and mission statements could be affected because sometimes they are offered at the national level and others at corporate level.

By offering a critical regard at the values that are publicly espoused by some of the most influential companies in Colombia, we enhance the comprehension of the prevailing ethical environment and the compatibility with the principles of the Global Compact.

We have studied key actors in a growing emerging market, which could advance Global Compact principles. Besides we have crafted a pedagogic and systemic prism through which values can be taught and thought. Thus, the methodological and theoretical framework facilitates subsequent empirical research, both in comparative and longitudinal ways.