Search results

The existing literature documents mixed evidence toward the association between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate tax planning (e.g., Davis, Guenther, Krull, & Williams, 2016; Hoi, Wu, & Zhang, 2013). In this study, I aim to identify a causal relationship between CSR and tax planning, leveraging the staggered adoptions of constituency statutes in US states, which is a plausibly exogenous shock to firms' emphasis on their social responsibility. In general, the statutes permit firm directors to consider the interests of all constituents when making business decisions, including those who benefit from firms paying their fair share of income taxes. Thus, the adoption of the statutes raises the importance of firms' social responsibility in paying income taxes. Employing a staggered difference-in-differences (DiD) method, I find that firms incorporated in states that have adopted constituency statutes exhibit significantly higher effective tax rates (ETRs) based on current tax expense. This causal relationship suggests that managers, with the legitimacy to consider the social impact of tax avoidance, become less aggressive in tax planning. I further find that the effect of adoption is stronger for financially unconstrained firms and firms in retail businesses, where the demand (cost) for tax avoidance is lower (higher). Finally, I show that my main results are driven by firms located in states with a high sense of social responsibility and firms with high levels of tax avoidance prior to the adoption. Overall, the findings in this chapter contribute to the literature by delineating a negative causal relationship between CSR and tax avoidance and identifying a positive social impact brought by the passage of constituency legislation.

This chapter presents a case study of a ‘Massive Open Online Courses’ (MOOCs) structure that is offered through an agreement between a traditional university and a MOOC provider. This arrangement has been helping in reaching very large numbers of learners in the Middle East. In implementing this agreement, I categorise the concerns of three key stakeholders (administrators, faculty and students) regarding this mode of instruction. A framework (abbreviated as LOGIC – LEADS – LEARNing) is proposed that could be of use to higher education institutions when they embark on non-traditional education. A common concern among the primary stakeholders was the issue of legitimacy of such an education. I argue the MOOCs so far do not represent a substitute or a threat to traditional face-to-face education. In addition, there are no foreseen reputational risks for universities if MOOCs are included as a mode of education. The value from MOOCs needs to be seen from the perspectives of students and other stakeholders. MOOCs have the potential to lead to positive consequences for the university − as a whole − and other relevant stakeholders as well. However, MOOCs in the Middle East are not likely to operate under a workable business model, at least not in the short run. As MOOCs rise to make more sense to students, their disruptive power would become more tangible. This, however, will take some time and will only be threatening if educational institutions become complacent in response to the novel ways by which the new generation is approaching learning.

A reason why industry incumbents seldom survive technology transitions is their strong reliance on an efficient, but inflexible organizational system. We studied three digital transformation initiatives that created fast progress in a struggling newspaper group by working against the industry logic and established thinking in the area. This chapter argues that management succeeded in introducing a new strategic practice through these transformation initiatives. We focus on three factors contributing to the success: complexity management, short time development of a long-term vision, and the introduction of impossible goals.

Constructivist grounded theory method (GTM) as outlined by Kathy Charmaz has its explicit roots in the American pragmatism and symbolic interactionism primarily developed at the University of Chicago during the early and mid-twentieth century. Symbolic interactionism considers people as active and interpretative agents who co-construct selves, identities, meanings, social actions, social worlds, and societies through interactions. Charmaz argues that symbolic interactionism is an open-ended theoretical perspective that fosters studying action, process, and meanings, with a focus on how people co-construct and negotiate meanings, orders, and actions in their everyday lives. In this chapter, I argue that constructivist GTM, including its theory-method package built upon symbolic interactionism and the Chicago School tradition, can be further combined with the new sociology of childhood to study children's social worlds and negotiated meanings, orders, and actions.