Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Relevance of Stakeholder Theory and Social Capital Theory in the Context of CSR in SMEs: An Australian Perspective

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

Abstract

The concept of business responsibility, usually termed as corporate social responsibility (CSR), originated in the early 1930s after the Wall Street crash of 1929 exposed corporate irresponsibility in large organisations. The understanding of CSR has evolved since then and its scope has now broadened from mere compliance to corporate laws to active alignment of internal business goals with externally set societal aspirations. Unfortunately, the significance of this multidimensional concept within the small and medium enterprise (SME) sector has continued to be overshadowed by its application in large and multinational organisations. More importantly, this has led to the practice of judging SMEs, which are experiencing increasing pressure to engage in social activities, as if they are no different from their larger counterparts. This study therefore investigates CSR from the perspective of SMEs in Australia without any theoretical presumptions and then comments on the relevance and applicability of the two theories that have been commonly used to investigate business responsibility, namely, stakeholder theory (ST) and social capital theory (SCT). The research findings indicate that CSR within the SME sector is more aligned to the fundamentals of SCT, mainly owing to the unique resource and survival challenges that they face, and which are, arguably, not so pronounced in large organisations.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

ABS:

Australian Bureau of Statistics

CSR:

Corporate social responsibility

OECD:

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

SCT:

Social capital theory

SME:

Small and medium enterprise

SRI:

Stanford Research Institute

ST:

Stakeholder theory

References

  • Adapa, S., & Rindfleish, J. (2011). Corporate social responsibility activities: similarities and differences between small and medium sized enterprises. Paper presented at the ANZMAC conference, 28–30 November, Perth, Australia.

  • Adler, P., & Kwon, S. W. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 17–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anglada, M. L. (2000). Small and medium-sized enterprises’ perceptions of the environment: A study from Spain. In R. Hillary (Ed.), Small and medium-sized enterprises and the environment (pp. 61–74). Sheffield: Greenleaf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2002). Generosity of Australian businesses. Canberra: AGPS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barry, H., & Milner, B. (2002). SMEs and e-commerce: A departure from the traditional prioritisation of training? Journal of European Industrial Training, 25(7), 316–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berle, A., & Means, G. (1932). The modern corporation and private property. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolton, J. E. (1971). Report of the committee of enquiry on small firms. London: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research in the sociology of education. New York: Greenwood Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, H. R. (1953). Social responsibilities of the businessman. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, F. (2000). Environmental visibility: A trigger for organisational response? Business Strategy and the Environment, 9(2), 92–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brenkert, G. (2002). Entrepreneurship, ethics and the good society. The Ruffin Series (Vol. 3, pp. 5–43). Charlottesville: Society for Society for Business Ethics.

  • Brenner, S. N., & Cochran, P. L. (1991). The stakeholder model of the firm: Implications for business and society theory and research. In J. F. MacMohan (Ed.), Proceedings of the International Association for Business and Society, Sundance, UH, pp. 449–467.

  • Brown, D. J., & King, J. B. (1982). Small business ethics: Influences and perceptions. Journal of Small Business Management, 20(1), 11–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunker, D. J., & MacGregor, R. C. (2000). Successful generation of information technology requirements for small/medium enterprises (SMEs)—cases from regional Australia. In Proceedings of the SMEs in a Global Economy, Wollongong, pp. 72–84.

  • Carr, P. (2003). Revisiting the protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism: Understanding the relationship between ethics and enterprise. Journal of Business Ethics, 47(1), 7–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497–505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of definitional construct. Business and Society, 38(3), 268–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castka, P., Balzarova, A., Bamber, C., & Sharp, J. M. (2003). How can SMEs effectively implement the CSR agenda—a UK case study perspective. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 11(3), 140–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • CED (1971). Social responsibilities of business corporations. New York: Committee for Economic Development.

  • Clarkson, M. B. E. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analysing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 92–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94(6), 95–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, UK: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Committee, Wiltshire. (1971). Report of the committee on small business. Canberra: The Government Printer of Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Curran, J., Rutherfoord, R., & Lloyd, S. (2000). Is there a local business community? Explaining the non-participation of small business in local economic development. Local Economy, 15(3), 128–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, D. R., & Cosier, R. A. (1982). The four faces of social responsibility. Business Horizons, 25(3), 19–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, K. (1973). The case for and against business assumption of social responsibilities. Academy of Management Journal, 16(2), 312–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dean, T., Brown, R., & Bamford, C. (1998). Differences in large and small firm responses in environmental context: Strategic implications from a comparative analysis of business formations. Strategic Management Journal, 19(8), 709–728.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deegan, C., & Unerman, J. (2006). Financial accounting theory. UK: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennis, C. (2000). Networking for marketing advantage. Management Decision, 38(4), 287–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidences and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drakopoulou Dodd, S., Jack, S., & Anderson, A. R. (2002). Scottish entrepreneurial networks in the international context. International Small Business Journal, 20(2), 213–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunham, L., Freeman, R. E., & Liedtka, J. (2006). Enhancing stakeholder practice: A particularized exploration of community. Business Ethics Quarterly, 16(1), 23–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eilbert, H., & Parker, I. R. (1973). The current status of corporate social responsibility. Business Horizons, 16(4), 5–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elms, H., Berman, S. L., & Wicks, A. C. (2002). Ethics and incentives: An inductive development of stakeholder theory in the health care industry. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12(4), 413–432.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, E. M. (1987). The corporate social policy process: Beyond business ethics, corporate social responsibility and corporate social responsiveness. California Management Review, 29(3), 99–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evan, W. M., & Freeman, R. E. (1988). A stakeholder theory of the modern corporation: Kantian capitalism. In T. L. Beauchamp & N. Bowie (Eds.), Ethical theory and business (pp. 75–84). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fallon, G., & Brown, R. (2000). Does Britain need public law status Chambers of Commerce? European Business Review, 12(1), 19–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, E., & Reuber, R. (2005). Industrial clusters and business development services for small and medium enterprises. In G. Wignaraja (Ed.), Competitive strategy in developing countries: A manual for policy analysis (pp. 131–165). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Marshfield: Pitman Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, S. (2002). A comprehensive model of the process of small firm internationalisation: A network perspective. Paper presented at the 18th Annual IMP Conference, Dijon, France, pp. 1–22.

  • Freeman, R. E., Harrison, S., Wicks, A., Parmar, B., & Colle, S. (2010). Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E., & Philips, R. (2002). Stakeholder theory: A libertarian defence. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12(3), 331–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. (1962). Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. London: Penguin Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, T., & Tian, Y. (2006). Social and symbolic capital and responsible entrepreneurship: An empirical investigation of SME narratives. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(3), 287–304.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gable, G. C. (1994). Integrating case study and survey research methods: An example in information systems. European Journal of Information Systems, 3(2), 112–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garriga, E., & Mele, D. (2004). Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory. Journal of Business Ethics, 53(1–2), 51–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaskill, L. R., Van Auken, H. E., & Manning, R. A. (1993). A factor analytic study of the perceived causes of small business failure. Journal of Small Business Management, 31(4), 18–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerstenfield, A., & Roberts, H. (2000). Size matters: Barriers and prospect for environmental management. In R. Hillary (Ed.), Small and medium-sized enterprises (pp. 106–118). Sheffield: Greenleaf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghoshal, S., & Moran, P. (1996). Bad for practice: A critique of the transaction cost theory. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 13–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glancey, K., Greig, M., & Pettigrew, M. (1998). Entrepreneurial dynamics in small business service firm. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 4(3), 249–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffee, R., & Scase, R. (1995). Corporate realities: The dynamics of large and small organisations. London: International Thomson Business Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graafland, J., & Smid, H. (2004). Reputation, corporate social responsibility and market regulation. Tijdchrift voor Economie en Management, 49(2), 271–308.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadjimonolis, A. (1999). Barriers to innovation for SMEs in a small less developed country (Cyprus). Technovation, 19(9), 561–570.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halpern, D. (1999). Social capital: The new golden goose. Unpublished review of Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Cambridge University, Cambridge.

  • Hanifan, L. J. (1916). The rural school community centre. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science., 67(1), 130–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, R., & Stewart, J. (2000). Human resource development in small organisations. Journal of European and Industrial Training, 24(2), 105–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, J., & Hitt, M. A. (1999). Corporate political strategy formulation: A model of approach, participation, and strategy decisions. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 825–842.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hitchens, D., Thankappan, S., Trainor, M., Clausen, J., & Marchi, B. (2005). Environmental performance, competitiveness and management of small businesses in Europe. Tijdschrift Voor Economische En Sociale Geografie, 96(5), 541–557.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horrigan, B. (2010). Corporate social responsibility in the 21st century: Debates, models and practices across government, law and business. Cheltenham: Edwar Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, J. (2000). Environment, information and networks: How does information reach small and medium-sized enterprises. In R. Hillary (Ed.), Small and medium-sized enterprises and the environment (pp. 194–202). Sheffield: Greenleaf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, H. (2004). A critique of conventional CSR theory: An SME perspective. Journal of General Management, 29(4), 37–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, H. (2006). Small business champions for corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(3), 241–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, H. (1971). Business in contemporary society: Framework and issues. Belmont: Wadsworth.

  • Joseph, E. (2000). A welcome engagement: SMEs and social inclusion. Southampton: Institute of Public Policy Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kawachi, I., Kennedy, B., Lochner, K., & Prothrow-Stith, D. (1997). Social capital, income inequality, and mortality. American Journal of Public Health, 87(9), 1491–1498.

    Google Scholar 

  • Key, S. (1999). Toward a new theory of the firm: A critique of stakeholder “theory”. Management Decision, 37(4), 317–328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Key, S., Bewley, L., & Vault, S. (2004). Stakeholder theory around the world: A twenty year retrospective. In Proceedings of Academy of International Business, Southeast USA, Annual Meeting, Knoxville, TN.

  • Larson, A. (1992). Network dyads in entrepreneurial settings: A study of the governance of exchange relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(1), 76–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leifer, E. M., & White, H. C. (1986). Wheeling and annealing: Federal and multidivisional Control. In J. F. Short (Ed.), The social fabric: Dimensions and issues (pp. 223–242). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lepoutre, J., & Heene, A. (2006). Investigating the impact of firm size on small business responsibility: A critical view. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(3), 257–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liao, J., & Welsch, H. (2005). Role of social capital in venture creation: Key dimensions and research implications. Journal of Small Business Management, 43(4), 345–362.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacMillan, I. C. (1975). Strategy and flexibility in the smaller business. Long Range Planning, 8(3), 62–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mankelow, G. (2003). Application of stakeholder theory to investigate small enterprise corporate social responsibility. Doctoral thesis, Southern Cross University, Australia.

  • Manne, H. G., & Wallich, H. C. (1972). The modern corporation and social responsibility. Washington DC: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.

  • Mazzarol, T. (2004). Strategic management of small firms: A proposed framework for entrepreneurial ventures. In Proceedings of the 17th annual SEAANZ conference—entrepreneurship as a way of the future, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

  • Meredith, G. G. (1994). Small business management (4th ed.). Sydney: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M., & Huberman, A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, N. L., & Besser, T. L. (2000). The importance of community values in small business strategy formation: Evidence from rural Iowa. Journal of Small Business Management, 38(1), 68–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. (1979). The structuring of organisations. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who or what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murillo, D., & Lozano, J. M. (2006). SMEs and CSR: An approach to CSR in their own words. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(3), 227–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, J. (1996). Small business management. London: Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital and the organisational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neuman, W. L. (2006). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nooteboom, B. (1994). Innovation and diffusion in small firms: Theory and evidence. Small Business Economics, 6(5), 327–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2001). The well-being of nations: The role of human and social capital. Paris: Centre for Educational Research and Innovation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrini, F. (2006). SMEs and CSR theory: Evidence and implications from an Italian perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(3), 305–316.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petts, J., Herd, A., Gerrard, S., & Horne, C. (1999). The climate and culture of environmental compliance within SMEs. Business Strategy and the Environment, 8(1), 14–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive strategy: Techniques for analysing industries and competitors. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Portes, A. (1998). Social capital: Its origin and application in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 24(1), 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. D. (1993). The prosperous community: Social capital and public life. In E. Ostrom & T. Ahn (Eds.), Foundations of social capital (pp. 529–536). Cheltenham: Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quayle, M. (2002). E-commerce: The challenge for UK SMEs in the twenty-first century. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 22(10), 1148–1161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raymond, L. (2001). Determinants of website implementation in small business. Internet Research: Electronic Network Applications and Policy, 11(5), 411–422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russo, A., & Perrini, F. (2010). Investigating stakeholder theory and social capital: CSR in large firms and SMEs. Journal of Business Ethics, 91(2), 207–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2003). Research methods for business students (3rd ed.). New York: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. J. (1999). Does size matter? The state of the art in small business ethics. Business Ethics: A European Review, 8(3), 163–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. J. (2000). Practices, priorities and ethics in small firms. London: Institute of Business Ethics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. J. (2004). Forever friends? Friendship, dynamic relationships and small firm social responsibility. Brunel Research in Enterprise, Innovation, Sustainability and Ethics Working Paper No. 8. West London.

  • Spence, L. J. (2007). CSR and small business in a European policy context: The five C’s of CSR and small business research agenda. Business and Society Review, 112(4), 533–552.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. J., & Rutherfoord, R. (2001). Social responsibility, profit maximisation and the small firm owner-manager. Small Business and Enterprise Development, 8(2), 126–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. J., & Schmidpeter, R. (2003). SMEs, social capital and the common good. Journal of Business Ethics, 45(1–2), 93–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. J., Schmidpeter, R., & Habisch, A. (2003). Assessing social capital: Small and medium sized enterprises in Germany and the UK. Journal of Business Ethics, 47(1), 17–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiner, G. A. (1971). Business and Society. New York: Random House.

  • Stewart, W. H, Jr, Watson, W. E., Carland, J. C., & Carland, J. W. (1998). A proclivity for entrepreneurship: A comparison of entrepreneurs, small business owners, and corporate managers. Journal of Business Venturing, 14(2), 189–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stieb, J. A. (2009). Assessing Freeman’s stakeholder theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(3), 401–414.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tetteh, E., & Burn, J. (2001). Global strategies for SME-business: Applying the SMALL framework. Logistics Information Management, 14(1–2), 171–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J., Smith, H., & Hood, J. (1993). Charitable contributions by small businesses. Journal of Small Business Management, 31(3), 35–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilley, F. (1999). The gap between the environmental attitudes and the environmental behaviour of small firms. Business Strategy and the Environment, 8(4), 238–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilley, F. (2000). Small firm environment ethics: How deep do they go? Business Ethics: A European Review, 9(1), 31–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Udayasankar, K. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and firm size. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(2), 167–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vives, A., Corral, A., & Isusi, I. (2005). Responsabilidad social de la empresa en las PYMES de Latinoamérica. Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Welsh, J. A., & White, J. F. (1981). A small business is not a little big business. Harvard Business Review, 59(4), 46–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westhead, P., & Storey, D. J. (1996). Management training and small firm performance: Why is the link so weak? International Small Business Journal, 14(4), 13–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wicks, A. C., Gilbert, D. R., & Freeman, R. E. (1994). A feminist interpretation of the stakeholder concept. Business Ethics Quarterly, 4(4), 475–497.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, D., Lynch-Wood, G., & Ramsay, J. (2006). Drivers of environmental behaviour in manufacturing SMEs and the implications for CSR. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(3), 317–330.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, D. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16(4), 691–718.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (1999). Bonds and bridges: Social capital and poverty. Washington DC.

  • Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Southern Cross Business School, Southern Cross University, Lismore, NSW, Australia

    Suman Sen & James Cowley

Authors
  1. Suman Sen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. James Cowley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Suman Sen.

Appendices

Appendix 1: Interview Questions

  1. (i)

    What do you understand by the term ‘CSR”?

  2. (ii)

    Do you think there is any social responsibility of your business?

  3. (iii)

    Do you find economic objectives of the business are in contradiction to moral obligations? If so, how do you manage them?

  4. (iv)

    What is your organisation doing in the area of CSR?

  5. (v)

    How would you like to prioritise the following CSR activities?

    1. (a)

      Donation for better cancer treatment

    2. (b)

      Additional medical benefit for employees

    3. (c)

      Sponsor a local football team

    4. (d)

      Funding a community group that opposes smoking

    5. (e)

      Financial support for employees to enhance professional skills

    6. (f)

      Control energy usage to reduce operational costs

  6. (vi)

    Is there any predetermined budget for CSR? If so, what factors affect them?

  7. (vii)

    Could you please inform how CSR decisions are taken in your business?

  8. (viii)

    To what extent do your stakeholders influence such decisions?

  9. (ix)

    Why is your company participating in CSR activities?

  10. (x)

    Are there any future plans about CSR? If so, what are they?

  11. (xi)

    Are you, or is your company, a member of any trade union or industry association? If so, what was the motivation for such involvement?

Appendix 2: Profile of the Participating SMEs

 

Name (pseudo) of the SME

Industry/business type

Number of employees

1

Company A

Language school

40

2

Company B

Aviation

66

3

Company C

Horse Race and Retail Sales

30+ casuals

4

Company D

Accounting Firm

30–35

5

Company E

Urban Vegetation Management

70

6

Company F

Website Designing

15

7

Company G

Coffee Shop- Retail Franchise

16 (Head Office only)

8

Company H

Construction

38–40

9

Company I

Fruit and Vegetable Retail

27

10

Company J

Accounts and Business Strategy

19

11

Company K

Accounting Firm

5

12

Company L

Marketing Communication

3

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sen, S., Cowley, J. The Relevance of Stakeholder Theory and Social Capital Theory in the Context of CSR in SMEs: An Australian Perspective. J Bus Ethics 118, 413–427 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1598-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1598-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation