Erratum to: A Bi-Directional Examination of the Relationship Between Corporate Social Responsibility Ratings and Company Financial Performance in the European Context

Erratum to: J Bus Ethics DOI 10.1007/s10551-015-2998-1

The substance and the conclusions of the paper remain unchanged. The page numbers listed below reflect the original pagination of the online published article (PDF version).

Modification of the Legend in Tables 3 and 6

Page	Location in the text	Original text	Replace with
12th	Table 3 (legend at the bottom of the table)	*** p < 0.0001, ** p < 0.001, * p < 0.01, ‘.’ p < 0.05	Signif. Codes: 0 ≤ ‘***’ ≤ 0.001 < ‘**’ ≤ 0.01 < ‘*’ ≤ 0.05 < ‘.’ ≤ 0.1
15th	Table 6 (legend at the bottom of the table)	*** p < 0.0001, ** p < 0.001, * p < 0.01, ‘.’ p < 0.05	Signif. Codes : 0 ≤ ‘***’ ≤ 0.001 < ‘**’ ≤ 0.01 < ‘*’ ≤ 0.05 < ‘.’ ≤ 0.1
15th	Table 6 (at the bottom of the table)	R 2 = 0.95 adjusted R 2: 0.95 F-statistics: 412	R 2 = 0.4129 adjusted R 2 = 0.3881 F-statistics: 16.66

Correction of a Sentence Page 7 and Page 11

Page	Location in the text	Original text	Replace with
7th	Col. 1 par. 2	“After removing banking and insurance companies, a total of 509 industrial companies remained […]”	“After removing banking and insurance companies, a total of 509 companies remained […]”
11th	Col. 2 par. 2 (after the equation)	With the exception of NETINCOME which is more significant and OPERATING P&L which is significant at the level of 5%, other variables produce […]	With the exception of NETINCOME which is more significant, other variables produce […]

Table 7 Should be Replaced by the Following Table

Table 7 Explained variable: CSR RATING CSR RATING _i,t  = α _i  + β ₁(STOCKRETURN _i,t−1) + β ₂(lnMARKETCAP _i,t−1) + β ₃(RISK _i,t−1) + γ(YEAR Dummies) + ε _i,t−1

Predictors	Coefficients	SE	t value	Pr (>|t|)
STOCKRETURN	−31.82	9.4	−3.39	7.48e−4***
lnMARKETCAP	33.54	2.11	15.91	<2e−16***
RISK	−78.34	16.76	−4.68	3.54e−06***
R 2 = 0.3331 adjusted R 2: 0.3251 F-statistics: 41.89, p value <2.2e−16

1. 0 ≤ ‘***’ ≤ 0.001 < ‘**’ ≤ 0.01 < ‘*’ ≤ 0.0 5< ‘.’ ≤0.1

Change of Indices in Models for Variables Market Capitalization and Risk (t to t − 1)

Page	Location in the text	Original text	Replace with
8th	Col. 1, Section. “Model 2 (General form)” (In the model)	$\left[ \ldots \right] + \beta_{ 1 0} \left( {{\text{lnMarket capitalization}}_{i,t} } \right)+ \beta_{ 1 1} \left( {\Delta \left( {{\text{Risk}}_{i,t} } \right)} \right) + \,\left[ \ldots \right]$	$\left[ \ldots \right] + \beta_{ 1 0} \left( {{\text{lnMarket capitalization}}_{{i,t{ - 1}}} } \right)+ \,\beta_{ 1 1} \left( {\Delta \left( {{\text{Risk}}_{{i ,t{ - 1}}} } \right)} \right) + \left[ \ldots \right]$
8th	Col. 1 (footnote number 11: to be totally deleted)	The control variables “capitalization” and “risk” are contemporaneous with the rating. That is why we take into account […]
12th	Col. 2 (in the model)	[…] + β 7(lnMARKETCAP i,t ) + β 8(RISK i,t ) + […]	[…] + β 7(lnMARKETCAP i,t−1) + β 8(RISK i,t−1) + […]
15th	Table 6 (at the bottom of the table)	[…] + β 7(lnMARKETCAP i,t ) + β 8(RISK i,t ) + […]	[…] + β 7(lnMARKETCAP i,t−1) + β 8(RISK i , t−1) + […]

Correction of Thresholds or R ² in the Text

Page	Location in the text	Original text	Replace with
11th	Col. 1, par. 1	[…] The average market return of the corresponding sector (coefficients significant at the 0.01%) for year 1	[…] The average market return of the corresponding sector (coefficients significant at the 0.1%) for year 1
11th	Col. 1, par. 2	[…] the stock market return of the companies versus the sector is negatively related to CSR rating (coefficient significant at the 0.1% level)	[…] the stock market return of the companies versus the sector is negatively related to CSR rating (coefficient significant at the 1% level)
11th	Col. 1, par. 3	[…] at the respective threshold of 5, 1 and 5%	[…] at the respective threshold of 10, 5 and 10%
11th	col. 1, par. 4	[…] between the CSR and R&D expenditures for the period 2 (at the threshold of 1%)	[…] between the CSR and R&D expenditures for the period 2 (at the threshold of 5%)
11th	Col. 1, par. 5	[…] between the CSR rating and the growth rate of turnover of period 1 (at the threshold of 1%)	[…] between the CSR rating and the growth rate of turnover of period 1 (at the threshold of 5%)
13th	Col. 1, par. 1	[…] Table 6 indicates a 95% adjusted R 2 for the model 2	[…] Table 6 indicates a 38.81% adjusted R 2 for the model 2
13th	Col. 1, par. 1	Market capitalization is significantly and positively related to CSR rating at the threshold of 0.01%	Market capitalization is significantly and positively related to CSR rating at the threshold of 0.1%
13th	Col. 2, par. 2	Surprisingly, our results also highlight a negative relationship at the threshold of 1% between STOCKRETURN and CSR rating	Surprisingly, our results also highlight a negative relationship at the threshold of 5% between STOCKRETURN and CSR rating.
15th	Col. 1, par. 3	[…] the difference between the risks of a company with respect to the risk of its sector is significantly and negatively related to the CSR rating (0.1% threshold)	[…] the difference between the risk of a company with respect to the risk of its sector is significantly and negatively related to the CSR rating (1% threshold)
15th	Col. 2, par. 3	[…] that CSR Rating is negatively and significantly related to TURNOVERGROWTH at the 5% threshold	[…] that CSR Rating is negatively and significantly related to TURNOVERGROWTH at the 10% threshold
16th	Col. 1, par. 1	However, the relationship remains significantly negative (at the threshold of 0.1%) […]	However, the relationship remains significantly negative (at the threshold of 1%) […]
17th	Col. 2, par. 1	[…] the characteristics of the company into its CSR rating (adjusted R 2 = 95%)	[…] the characteristics of the company into its CSR rating (adjusted R 2 = 38.81%)
17th	Col. 2, par. 2	[…] which, in turn, are strongly negatively related to subsequent CSR ratings (adjusted R 2 = 89.16%) see Table 7”	[…] which, in turn, are strongly negatively related to subsequent CSR ratings (adjusted R 2 = 32.51% see Table 7)