Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explore the current status and identify the main trends in leading Russian companies’ corporate sustainability model transformation in the context of achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs).

A theoretical approach is based on the interpretation of corporate sustainability model transformation within the corporate social performance (CSP) framework. The corporate sustainability model is described according to Dyllick and Muff (2016) business sustainability (BST) 1.0-3.0 spectrum. The analysis is settled on survey data collected from leading Russian companies participated in the “Report on Social Investments in Russia” project conducted by the Russian Managers Association from 2008 to 2019.

This paper finds that the BST 2.0 is becoming a dominant model based on the “creating shared value” goal. The related CSP is characterized by their orientation to the principles of the UN Global Compact; by the emergence of a coordinating role for specialized departments of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and/or sustainability; and by the regular sustainability reporting. The SDGs are generally correlated with responsible business practices that are already in existence in companies. The emerging trend towards the advanced BST 3.0 model including the SDGs integration into the main business processes is constrained by the lack of active cooperation between companies.

The research sample includes only large Russian companies with a significant industry diversity, participating in the “Report on Social Investments in Russia” project, thereby restricting the analysis of non-participants. The relatively low repetition of participants in this long-term project does also restrict the degree of generalization. Future research could be based on the findings of this paper to create and test hypotheses via a nationwide study of Russian businesses as well as cross-national comparative studies.

The analysis of the corporate sustainability model transformation through studying the key CSP framework elements could support Russian companies in creating systemic changes of their principles, processes and outcomes measurements in the context of achieving the UN SDGs.

This study contributes to existing literature by combining the corporate sustainability model transformation analysis with the CSP framework. It describes the experience of large Russian companies that publicly position themselves as national leaders in the field of CSR and sustainable development.

The purpose of this paper is to build a typology of social entrepreneurship in Russian Federation and describe the related models based on a deep understanding of the current institutional context and the positioning of social entrepreneurship in the arena of market and non-market activities.

This paper is based on secondary data sources including legal documents, annual reports and websites of the social entrepreneurship-related organizations.

This paper finds that social entrepreneurship in Russia is located between civil society, the State and the market and it is the State that became a main driving force behind social entrepreneurship development.

This paper is the first to perceive the social entrepreneurship in modern Russia as a phenomenon with “semi-official” status. The original models and the very typology of social entrepreneurship are based on the newly introduced concept of “social-entrepreneurial mission”.

The aim of this paper is to examine how companies officially recognized in Russia as corporate philanthropy leaders actually introduce, implement, and evaluate philanthropic activities. Focusing on the connections between these activities and corporate strategy, the paper seeks to investigate the main trends in corporate philanthropy development over the period 2007‐2010, assuming that corporate philanthropy is an integral part of corporate social performance.

A theoretical framework is based on the recognition of “strategic” philanthropy as a part as well as the main trend in current philanthropic activities of leading companies. The analysis as such is settled on survey data collected from participants in the national “Corporate Philanthropy Leaders” award competition conducted by the Russian business newspaper Vedomosti, PwC, and the non‐profit grant‐making organization “Donors Forum” from 2008 to 2011.

The results testify to strengthening connections between corporate philanthropy and corporate strategy, enhancing the strategic nature of philanthropy as such. Here the responding companies significantly diversified the directions of their philanthropic activities, whereas the distribution of corporate philanthropy by form showed a high stability that was practically unaffected by the economic crisis of 2008‐2009. A common practice is the professionalization of managing corporate philanthropy, with a growing role for CSR departments.

The study focuses on the activities of leading Russian companies participating in the national “Corporate Philanthropy Leaders” award competition, thereby restricting the analysis of non‐participants. Moreover, the evolution of competition surveys and their methodology as well as relatively low repetition of participants also restrict the degree of generalization. Future research could be based on the findings of this study to create hypotheses to be tested on a broader sample of Russian companies.

The majority of studies of corporate philanthropy in Russia are still covering the necessity of corporate philanthropy for resolving societal problems and describing particular “best practice” cases rather than analyzing the relation of corporate philanthropy to the whole system of CSP and its strategic applications. This study aims to address this gap by focusing on corporate philanthropy leaders as a first step to broad nationwide research.

Against the backcloth of a growing geopolitical and economic importance of emerging economies, this paper seeks to ask whether emerging economy firms are willing to match their increased economic weight with greater social responsibility. Given a relative scarcity of research into CSR in Russia, particular attention is to be given to firms from that country.

The research question is examined through an analysis of differences between firms from industrialized nations, transition economies, and newly industrialized countries in terms of the breadth and depth of their sustainability reporting. This three‐way comparison analyses corporate sustainability reporting according to the GRI G3 framework developed by the Global Reporting Initiative.

The firms in the sample display clear evidence of a divide between industrialized and emerging economies, with Russia occupying a middle position. Contrary to expectations, however, emerging economy firms outperform those from industrialized nations in their coverage of GRI indicators.

These findings leave open two possible conclusions: either emerging economy MNEs have leaped to the front in terms of addressing sustainability or they have been able to use GRI reporting as window‐dressing to hide a dirtier reality. From a different angle, the strong evidence of a North‐South divide in the sample also lends support to the national business systems approach to CSR.

The paper adds to a small but growing body of cross‐national studies into CSR that go beyond OECD member countries. In particular, it constitutes one of the first studies not only to tease out CSR priorities of large Russian firms but also to elucidate differences in terms of CSR priorities between newly industrialized countries and transition economies.

This paper seeks to make a contribution to debate regarding the place of sustainability in the management education curriculum with data regarding the opinions on this question of business leaders across both developed and emerging markets.

The analysis in this paper was conducted at the invitation of the secretariat of the UN PRME, led by a team from Ashridge and EABIS, supported by Accenture, and presented for the first time at the 2nd Global Forum for Responsible Management Education convened by the UN in New York in June 2010. The analysis draws on data collected by Accenture as part of the UN Global Compact‐Accenture CEO Study 2010, which included in‐depth interviews with 50 CEOs, Chairpersons and Presidents of UN Global Compact member companies and an online survey of 766 Global Compact member CEOs.

Among CEOs of those organizations that have begun thinking in a sophisticated way about trends relating to sustainability, there is a growing consensus across both developed and emerging markets, and across different industries and organization type, that management education is one of the most important elements in stimulating the kind of organizational change required to effectively address those trends.

The data suggest that debate in business schools about whether or not sustainability is a real issue deserving of their consideration is becoming less relevant. Questions that become more important include: how to do management education for sustainability well? And how can we effectively stimulate the kind of organizational change that needs to occur in business schools for sustainability to be embraced across the faculty?

Areas for further research include empirical research on both the most effective pedagogical approaches for management education for sustainability, and the most effective strategies for organizational change for sustainability within business schools themselves.

This paper presents a snapshot of business leader opinion from the first part of 2010, and thus complements earlier similar surveys of business leader opinion on the question of the place of sustainability in the management education curricula. This will be of particular interest to administrators and teaching faculty within business schools across both developed and emerging markets.

As a multi‐speed recovery from the downturn accelerates progress towards a multi‐polar world in which economic power is more widely dispersed, the emerging markets will play a critical role in the future success of multinational companies. The imperatives faced by companies seeking to secure their future competitiveness can be better appreciated through an understanding of the sustainability landscape, and this paper seeks to examine perspectives on environmental, social and governance issues from CEOs in the emerging markets.

The paper is based on extensive conversations with business leaders, both through the authors' work with leading multinational companies and their survey of over 800 global CEOs conducted in partnership with the United Nations Global Compact – the largest CEO study on sustainability to date. In the spirit of contributing to the debate on corporate sustainability, the paper presents the findings not as an academic submission, but rather as a reflective practitioner paper based on the authors' applied research. Their intention throughout is to faithfully report the views of the CEOs interviewed and surveyed, offering in places the beginnings of their own explanation of their results, and highlighting areas for future research and engagement by academics and educators.

As one looks towards the next decade, and new waves of growth, it is clear that CEOs are beginning to recognize the scale of the challenge they face in aligning sustainability with core business. They also recognize, however, that this transition will depend on the economy's most powerful force, business – and that, with immediate and sustained action, individual companies can play a critical role in building the foundations of a more sustainable economy. From the wide‐ranging set of interviews and survey responses, it seems that nowhere does this seem to be more keenly felt than in the emerging markets, and it is hoped that this is a timely and useful contribution to advancing the debate, with a unique insight into the views of CEOs and global leaders on what it will take to reach a new era of sustainability.

This paper, based on extensive conversations with an unprecedented set of leading global CEOs, presents perspectives of leading CEOs in the emerging markets. By examining the forces shaping businesses' response to societal demands and the challenges of corporate sustainability, the authors set out some of the ways in which business is responding – and some of the capabilities that will be required to secure companies' competitiveness on the journey to a new era of sustainability.

With increasing research focus paid to dynamic capabilities, there is an increased need to explore how dynamic capabilities can help business firms to realize corporate responsibility with stakeholders for achieving sustainable competitive advantage. The purpose of this paper is to explore the mediation effect of strategic alliance with stakeholders on the relationship between dynamic capabilities and sustainable competitive advantage in China, an emerging market, to give suggestions on how to manage corporate responsibility to address a rapidly changing environment.

The paper tested its hypotheses on a sample in the context of China. Specifically, 700 questionnaires were sent out; 300 were collected, of which 227 were usable. The partial least squares (PLS) structural equation modeling approach was used to analyze the data and test the hypotheses.

The paper has incorporated dynamic capabilities view and corporate responsibility perspective to explain the effects of strategic alliance with different stakeholders to sustainability in emerging markets. The empirical results show that opportunity‐sensing capability, reconfiguration capability and technological flexibility capability have significant impacts on sustainable competitive advantage. Additionally, the finding indicates that the effect of opportunity‐sensing capability on sustainable competitive advantage is fully mediated by strategic alliance with stakeholders. Moreover, the result indicates that the influence of reconfiguration capability on sustainable competitive advantage is partially mediated by strategic alliance with stakeholders. The result indicates that the influence of technological flexibility capability on sustainable competitive advantage is partially mediated by strategic alliance with stakeholders too.

Combining theory and evidence from the study, an empirical verification of the links between dynamic capabilities and sustainable competitive advantage in the context of China's emerging economy was conducted. This theme has not yet been studied in the current literature in corporate responsibility. The research suggests that business firms can employ dynamic capabilities to achieve sustainable competitive advantage by means of strategic alliance to meet corporate responsibility to address hyper‐competitive environments.

Examining a three‐year disclosure experience of a sample of Fortune 100 global companies, the paper aims to propose and test a model that relates the structure of CSR disclosure to corporate social performance. Based on the results obtained, it proposes to draw implications for emerging economies.

Combining content analysis of CSR reports and corporate social performance data, the paper built a longitudinal dataset starting from the population of worldwide companies included in the AccountAbility Rating between 2004 and 2007. Longitudinal regression analysis is performed on a final sample size of 114 firm‐year observations involving 38 firms over a three‐year period.

The paper finds evidence that the level of disclosure does not improve firm ability to manage stakeholders. However, a finer‐grained analysis of the structure of disclosure shows that better social performers are those who increased the breadth of their disclosure to stakeholders and uniformly distributed disclosure across stakeholders.

Results provide an empirical test for the theories describing true responsible economic actors as those who are able to combine high engagement with the social context of reference and balanced coverage of diversified interests. However, the study suffers the usual limitations of content analysis‐based research, as well as exclusively relying on CSR disclosure by large corporations.

Findings suggest not only the importance of structuring the report in a comprehensive way, and extending coverage to multiple stakeholders and related issues, but also the need for balance between informative needs, thus avoiding concentrated structures. Accordingly, companies that report on more themes, presenting a balanced and comprehensive product, develop a better ability to manage their stakeholder network, thus gaining higher corporate social performance.

The study seeks to revisit the relation between CSR disclosure and corporate social performance, answering the request for more rigorous measures. It goes beyond the level of disclosure as a comprehensive proxy of firm‐stakeholder dialogue and demonstrates how a finer‐grained analysis of the structure of disclosure can be a better predictor of superior performance.