Search results

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate political activity (CPA) are two important components of firms’ nonmarket strategies, oriented toward shaping the firm’s political and social conditions. Although this is acknowledged in the literature, there are contradictory arguments and evidence, concerning, first, whether and under which conditions firms align their CPA and CSR activities, and second, what the impacts might be if they do align these activities. In light of this, this chapter draws from earlier reviews of nonmarket strategies, to explore the factors at multiple levels, macro and micro, that may drive a firm’s alignment of CPA and CSR. In doing so, we draw from management research to identify the macro- and micro-level factors that shape CPA and CSR alignment as CSR and CPA alignment research mostly focuses on outcomes rather than identifying the drivers of alignment. We develop a general model that integrates the macro- and micro-level discussions to make suggestions about where future research needs to go to increase understanding of when corporations will combine their CPA and CSR efforts and the merits of these efforts.

The purpose of this paper is to understand differences between the strategic level and the operational level of corporate responsibility within an organization.

The research was conducted as a single case study of one of the more noteworthy Finnish firms with respect to corporate responsibility reporting.

The results show that strategic and operational levels differ in terms of their developmental stage of corporate responsibility. The strategic level is more focused on responsibility issues concerning external stakeholders, on reporting, on corporate image and on quantitative measures. The operational level emphasizes internal stakeholders, acting, daily existence, and qualitative criteria.

A well‐known corporate responsibility model was useful for identifying how perspectives concerning corporate social responsibility vary within the corporation. However, to explore the reasons for this variation, the actors, actions, outcomes and drivers of corporate responsibility need to be examined. The single case study method limits the generalizability of the results.

The research presents a unique case study with novel empirical data. The study contributes to the corporate responsibility research by discussing the differences between words and deeds of corporate responsibility, by testing the usefulness of a corporate responsibility framework and by trying to understand the reasons why different functions of an organization are at different developmental stages regarding corporate responsibility.

The purpose of this paper is to shed new light on the way the cross-sector collaboration (CSC) process can foster gender-focused sustainability initiatives to improve female workers’ conditions in developing countries. The study does so by introducing and examining the influence of nonprofit boundary work during the CSC process.

The paper is based on thirty-four interviews and qualitative fieldwork. It draws on a case analysis of a regional CSC between multiple organizations operating locally in the apparel industry of Bangladesh, a developing country.

Scaffolding work in the CSC formation stage – performed by development agency implementers who construe boundaries – and sensitization work in the CSC implementation stage – performed by a non-governmental organization (NGO) implementers who blur and expand boundaries – emerge as two conceptual categories of nonprofit boundary work. This allows NGO implementers to identify and enable the agency of sustainability envoys or socially privileged individuals who capitalize on their social credentials to support female workers in the factory and in the community.

The study offers novel insights into the CSC process. It contributes to the CSC literature and the literature on boundary work, with a focus on gender-focused sustainability initiatives for female workers in developing countries.