Search results

This research provides accounting-ethics authors and administrators with a benchmark for accounting-ethics research. While Bernardi and Bean (2010) considered publications in business-ethics and accounting’s top-40 journals this study considers research in eight accounting-ethics and public-interest journals, as well as, 34 business-ethics journals. We analyzed the contents of our 42 journals for the 25-year period between 1991 through 2015. This research documents the continued growth (Bernardi & Bean, 2007) of accounting-ethics research in both accounting-ethics and business-ethics journals. We provide data on the top-10 ethics authors in each doctoral year group, the top-50 ethics authors over the most recent 10, 20, and 25 years, and a distribution among ethics scholars for these periods. For the 25-year timeframe, our data indicate that only 665 (274) of the 5,125 accounting PhDs/DBAs (13.0% and 5.4% respectively) in Canada and the United States had authored or co-authored one (more than one) ethics article.

Prior research shows different associations between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and executive compensation in the United States versus Canada (i.e., McGuire et al., 2003; Mahoney & Thorne, 2006). It follows that these cross-national differences may be attributable to: (1) different compensation strategies; (2) other national differences; or (3) differences in the sampling and measurement techniques used in the respective studies. To gain insight into the factors underlying the cross-national differences, our study uses a single statistical approach on a U.S./Canada database to compare the association between CSR and executive compensation while controlling for size, industry, financial structure, and using common measures of salary, bonus and long-term compensation (LTC). We find that after controlling for size there are no differences in the association between executive compensation and CSR between the United States and Canada, and that LTC is positively associated with CSR in both countries. Thus, our findings suggest that previously reported differences in CSR between the United States and Canada are likely due to differences in the size of the firms used in the samples from the respective countries. Furthermore, our findings show the importance of the association between LTC and CSR for both the U.S. and the Canadian context. Implications of these findings are discussed.

The rate of alliance formation by firms has greatly increased over the past two decades. Congruently, firm interest in corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives has also increased. Signaling theory suggests that firms may be increasing their CSR strategies in an effort to signal their willingness to operate within social mores. However, firms are faced with the problem of how to communicate their social commitment objectively to stakeholders. We argue that firms are forming CSR alliances in an attempt to signal an objective message to stakeholders concerning their commitment to CSR. To provide insight into these explanations, we compare the Total CSR performance (TCSR) scores of firms that form CSR alliances with those firms that do not. We control for firm size, leverage, profitability, and industry. We find that firms that form CSR alliances generally have higher TCSR scores, which suggests that one of the reasons that firms form these alliances is to publicize their stronger social and environmental records to stakeholders.

This research is one of the first studies to examine the effects of CSR disclosures on a firm’s decision to purchase back their own shares of stocks. Additionally, the authors examine whether the effect of CSR disclosures is stronger than the effect of CSR performance on the decision to repurchase shares. Examining firms in the United States, the authors find that total CSR disclosures and the CSR disclosures related to the dimensions of social, environmental, and governance are significantly and positively related to the number of shares that a firm buys back. Additionally, the authors find that the effects of CSR disclosures are stronger for total and the CSR dimensions of social and governance than for CSR performance. For the environmental dimension of CSR, both disclosure and performance scores are significant. This research expands our understanding of the impact of CSR disclosure by showing the importance it plays in the decision to buy back stock and implies that firms that repurchase their stock are more socially responsive than firms that do not. Finally, it contributes to the growing literature on how CSR disclosure has a different impact than CSR performance on firm decisions and outcomes.

Increasingly, U.S. firms voluntarily issue standalone corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports to demonstrate to society a commitment to social and environmental activities (Bebbington, Larrinaga, & Moneva, 2008; Erusalimsky, Gray, & Spence, 2006). To ascertain the effect of standalone CSR reports on investors, we compared the association between CSR performance scores and subsequent stock returns for firms that issue standalone CSR reports versus those that do not. Consistent with a signaling perspective (Akerlof, 1970), we found that firms that voluntarily issue standalone CSR reports have a stronger association between total CSR and CSR strengths and subsequent stock returns than firms that do not. Our findings indicated that investors are relying on standalone CSR reports because they reward CSR performance for firms that issue standalone CSR reports CSR performance for those that do not issue standalone CSR reports.

Our paper explores the evolution in the reporting of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) for 115 Canadian firms (51 cross-listed on U.S. stock exchanges) throughout the seven year period of 1999–2006, which was the period before and after SOX and Bill 198 were enacted, resulting in a period of increasing pressure for CSR and CSR disclosure (Ballou, Heitger, & Landes, 2006). We examined CSR scores for Canadian firms listed only on Canadian stock exchanges and for Canadian firms cross-listed on U.S. exchanges. During this period, our analysis shows an overall decrease in CSR scores for all Canadian firms in our sample, and for both our subsamples of firms: Canadian firms cross-listed on U.S. stock exchanges and Canadian firms listed only on Canadian exchanges. Our analysis suggests that as a result of increased scrutiny facilitated by the regulatory changes, CSR disclosures become more transparent and comprehensive: CSR Strengths and CSR Weaknesses Scores both declined after 2002 resulting in an overall decline in Total CSR scores. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

The authors’ examination of corporate social responsibility (CSR) scores in dual-class firms provides a window on firms’ CSR performance when insulated from external pressure. Dual-class ownership confers greater voting rights on a superior class of shares held by insiders; consequently, managers of dual-class firms are insulated from external pressure from inferior class shareholders and, potentially, from society. The authors compare CSR scores in dual- and single-class firms and investigate the association between CSR scores and cash flow rights in dual-class firms. This analysis reveals that dual-class firms have lower CSR scores than their single-class counterparts and that CSR scores in dual-class firms are positively related to the relative cost of CSR borne by the superior class of shares. The findings suggest that external accountability encourages CSR performance, and CSR performance is higher when the superior class bears a smaller portion of the cost of CSR activities. It follows that the analysis suggests the importance of governance structures for encouraging CSR, and the dampening impact of cost to CSR performance.

We examine the perceived influence of externally generated firm ratings of corporate social responsibility (CSR) on voting for shareholder-sponsored CSR proposals. Using stakeholder and legitimacy theories, we introduce two rationales that relate shareholder voting decisions to the firm’s CSR performance: the complementary perspective where investors rely on management’s branding or image of the firm for CSR performance, and the sufficiency perspective where shareholders consider legitimacy effects of firm CSR performance. Our examination of 473 CSR shareholder-sponsored proposals during the 2013 to 2015 proxy seasons reveals a negative relationship between support for shareholder-sponsored CSR proposals and CSR strengths, particularly for social and environmental CSR strengths. We also find a positive relationship between support for shareholder-sponsored CSR proposals and CSR concerns, particular in the area of environmental CSR concerns. These results partially support the sufficiency perspective that incorporates shareholder legitimacy concerns. When companies have poor CSR performance, shareholders may view further CSR initiatives as beneficial to the firm.