Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

When CEO Career Horizon Problems Matter for Corporate Social Responsibility: The Moderating Roles of Industry-Level Discretion and Blockholder Ownership

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper examines the influence of CEO career horizon problems on corporate social responsibility (CSR). We assume that as CEOs are getting older, they tend to disengage in CSR due to their shorter career horizons. We further argue that high levels of industry-level discretion (ILD) and blockholder ownership amplify the negative effects of CEO age on CSR. Using a panel sample of US-based firms over 2004–2009, we do not find the main effect of CEO age on CSR, but find support for the moderating effects, such that CEO age is negatively associated with CSR when there are high levels of ILD and blockholder ownership. Therefore, results suggest that CEO career horizon problems matter for CSR when (1) CEOs have sufficient discretion over the firm’s strategic decisions and (2) outside blockholders put more pressure on CEOs to engage in financial earning management.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  • Aguilera, R., Rupp, D., Williams, C., & Ganapathi, J. (2007). Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: A multilevel theory of social change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32, 836–863.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arora, P., & Dharwadkar, R. (2011). Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility (CSR): The moderating roles of attainment discrepancy and organization slack. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 19, 136–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barker, V. L., & Mueller, G. (2002). CEO characteristics and firm R&D spending. Management Science, 48, 782–801.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnea, A., & Rubin, A. (2010). corporate social responsibility as a conflict between shareholders. Journal of Business Ethics, 97, 71–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barron, J. M., Chulkov, D., & Waddell, G. R. (2010). Top management team turnover, CEO succession type, and strategic change. Journal of Business Research, 64, 904–910.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baysinger, B., & Hoskisson, R. E. (1990). The composition of boards of directors and strategic control: Effects on corporate strategy. Academy of Management Review, 15, 72–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beasley, M. S. (1996). An empirical analysis of the relation between the board of director composition and financial statement fraud. Accounting Review, 71, 443–465.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boehm, A. (2005). The participation of businesses in community decision making. Business and Society, 44, 144–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolton, P., Scheinkman, J. A., & Xiong, W. (2006). Pay for short-term performance: Executive compensation in speculative markets. Review of Economic Studies, 73, 577–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brickley, J. A., Lease, R. C., & Smith, C. W. (1988). Ownership structure and voting on antitakeover amendments. Journal of Financial Economics, 20, 267–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchholtz, A. K., & Ribbens, B. A. (1994). Role of Chief Executive Officers in takeover resistance: Effects of CEO incentives and individual characteristics. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 554–579.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, L., & Logsdon, J. M. (1996). How corporate social responsibility pays off. Long Range Planning, 29, 495–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, M. A., Geletkanycz, M. A., & Sanders, W. G. (2004). Upper echelons research revisited: Antecedents, elements and consequences of top management team composition. Journal of Management, 30, 749–778.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, Y. K., Oh, W. Y., Jung, J. C., & Lee, J. Y. (2012). Firm size and corporate social performance: The mediating role of outside director representation. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 19, 486–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, Y. K., Oh, W. Y., & Messersmith, J. G. (2013). Translating corporate social performance into financial performance: Exploring the moderating role of high-performance work practices. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24, 3738–3756.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coad, A., & Rao, R. (2008). Innovation and firm growth in high-tech sectors: A quantile regression approach. Research Policy, 37, 633–648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, P., Cohen, J., West, S. J., & Aiken, L. S. (2002). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Lawrence Earlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, W. N., Xie, B., & Ning, Y. (2007). The influence of executive age, career horizon and incentives on pre-turnover earnings management. Journal of Management and Governance, 11, 45–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawkins, J., & Lewis, S. (2003). CSR in stakeholder expectations and their implications for company strategy. Journal of Business Ethics, 44, 185–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dechow, P., & Sloan, R. (1991). Executive incentives and the horizon problem. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 14, 51–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • den Hond, F., & de Bakker, F. G. A. (2007). Ideologically motivated activism: How activist groups influence corporate social change activities. Academy of Management Review, 32, 901–924.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Oxford: Capstone.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, M. (2008). Making sustainability work. Best practices in managing and measuring corporate social, environmental and economical impacts. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koheler Publishers and Greenleaf Publishing.

  • Fahlenbrach, R., & Stulz, R. (2011). Bank CEO incentives and the credit crisis. Journal of Financial Economics, 99, 11–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26, 301–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkelstein, S., & Boyd, B. K. (1998). How much does the CEO matter? The Role of Managerial Discretion in the Setting of CEO Compensation. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 179–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkelstein, S., & Hambrick, D. C. (1990). Top-management-team tenure and organizational outcomes: The moderating role of managerial discretion. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 484–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey, P. C., Merrill, C. B., & Hansen, J. M. (2009). The relationship between corporate social responsibility and shareholder value: An empirical test of the risk management hypothesis. Strategic Management Journal, 30, 425–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, S. R., & Cannella, A. A. (1997). The role of risk in executive compensation. Journal of Management, 23, 517–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, J. J., & Mahon, J. E. (1997). The corporate social performance and corporate financial performance debate: Twenty-five years of incomparable research. Business and Society, 36, 5–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grimm, C. M., & Smith, K. G. (1991). Management and organizational change: A note on the railroad industry. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 557–562.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, K., & Sokolowsky, J. (2010). Large shareholders and the pressure to manage earnings. Journal of Corporate Finance, 16, 302–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haleblian, J., & Finkelstein, S. (1993). Top management team size, CEO dominance, and firm performance: The moderating roles of environmental turbulence and discretion. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 844–863.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hambrick, D. C. (2007). Upper echelons theory: An update. Academy of Management Reivew, 32, 334–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hambrick, D. C., & Abrahamson, E. (1995). Assessing managerial discretion across industries: A multi-method approach. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 1427–1441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hambrick, D. C., & Finkelstein, S. (1987). Managerial discretion: A bridge between polar views of organizational outcomes. Research in Organizational Behavior, 9, 369–406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. (1984). Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9, 193–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, A. D., Miller, D., & Hambrick, D. C. (2006). How quickly do CEOs become obsolete? Industry dynamism, CEO tenure, and company performance. Strategic Management Journal, 27, 447–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herrmann, P., & Datta, D. K. (2002). CEO successor characteristics and the choice of foreign market entry mode: An empirical study. Journal of International Business Studies, 33, 551–569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hox, J. J. (2010). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications (2nd ed.). Routledge: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. A., & Greening, D. W. (1999). The effects of corporate governance and institutional ownership types on corporate social performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 564–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kacperczyk, A. (2009). With greater power comes greater responsibility? Takeover protection and corporate attention to stakeholders. Strategic Management Journal, 30, 261–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, S. N., & Minton, B. A. (2012). How has CEO turnover changed? International Review of Finance, 12, 57–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keats, B. W., & Hitt, M. A. (1988). A causal model of linkages among environmental dimensions, macro organizational characteristics, and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 570–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keegan, J., & Kabanoff, B. (2008). Indirect industry and subindustry-level managerial discretion measurement. Organizational Research Methods, 11, 682–694.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, P., & Rabinovitch, R. (2011). CEO entrenchment and corporate risk management. SSRN 1760201.

  • Lawrence, B. S. (1997). The black box of organizational demographics. Organization Science, 8, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levesque, M., & Minniti, M. (2006). The effect of aging on entrepreneurial behavior. Journal of Business Venturing, 21, 177–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liberson, S., & O’Connor, J. F. (1972). Leadership and organizational performance: A study of large corporations. American Sociological Review, 37, 117–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahapatra, S. (1984). Investor reaction to a corporate social accounting. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 11, 29–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney, L. S., & Thorn, L. (2006). An examination of the structure of executive compensation and corporate social responsibility: A Canadian investigation. Journal of Business Ethics, 69, 149–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manner, M. (2010). The impact of CEO characteristics on corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 93, 53–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matta, E., & Beamish, P. W. (2008). The accentuated CEO career horizon problem: Evidence from international acquisitions. Strategic Management Journal, 29, 683–700.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mattingly, J. E., & Berman, S. L. (2006). Measurement of corporate social action: Discovering taxonomy in the Kinder Lydenburg Domini ratings data. Business and Society, 45, 20–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McClelland, P. L., Barker, V. L., & Oh, W. Y. (2012). CEO career horizon and tenure: Future performance implications under different contingencies. Journal of Business Research, 65, 1387–1393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, J., Dow, S., & Argheyd, K. (2003). CEO incentives and corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 45, 341–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliam, A., & Siegel, D. (2000). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: Correlation or misspecification? Strategic Management Journal, 21, 603–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, G. (2001). Corporate social and financial performance: An investigation in the U.K. Supermarket Industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 34, 299–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neter, J., Wasserman, W., & Kutner, M. H. (1985). Applied linear statistical models. Homewood, IL: Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oh, W. Y., Chang, Y. K., & Martynov, A. (2011). The effect of ownership structure on corporate social responsibility: Empirical evidence from Korea. Journal of Business Ethics, 104, 283–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organizational Studies, 24, 403–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rabe-Hesketh, S., & Skrondal, A. (2005). Multilevel and longitudinal modeling using stata. College Station, TX: Stata Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rajagopalan, N., & Datta, D. K. (1996). CEO characteristics: Does industry matter? Academy of Management Journal, 39, 125–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriquez, P., Siegel, D. S., Hillman, A., & Eden, L. (2006). Three lenses on the multinational enterprise: Politics, corruption, and corporate social responsibility. Journal of International Business Studies, 37, 733–746.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Society for Human Resource Management. (2007). Corporate social responsibility in United States, Australia, India, China, Canada, Mexico and Brazil: A pilot study. Alexandria, VA: Society for Human Resource Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanwick, P., & Stanwick, S. (1998). The relationship between corporate social performance, and organizational size, financial performance, and environmental performance: An empirical examination. Journal of Business Ethics, 17, 195–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Udayasankar, K. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and firm size. Journal of Business Ethics, 83, 167–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veiga, J. F. (1983). Mobility influences during managerial career stages. Academy of Management Journal, 26, 64–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance–financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 303–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, H., Choi, J., & Li, J. (2008). Too Little or Too Much? Untangling the relationship between corporate philanthropy and Firm Financial Performance. Organization Science, 19, 143–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, A., Sonnenfeld, J. A., & Kimberly, J. R. (1995). In search of a kingdom: Determinants of subsequent career outcomes for chief executives who are fired. Human Resource Management, 34, 117–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Haskayne School of Business, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada

    Won-Yong Oh

  2. College of Business & Economics, University of Wisconsin-Whitewater, 809 W. Starin Road, Whitewater, WI, 53190, USA

    Young Kyun Chang

  3. School of Business, University of Kansas, 1300 Sunnyside Ave., Lawrence, KS, 66045-7585, USA

    Zheng Cheng

Authors
  1. Won-Yong Oh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Young Kyun Chang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zheng Cheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Won-Yong Oh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Oh, WY., Chang, Y.K. & Cheng, Z. When CEO Career Horizon Problems Matter for Corporate Social Responsibility: The Moderating Roles of Industry-Level Discretion and Blockholder Ownership. J Bus Ethics 133, 279–291 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2397-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2397-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation