Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Lights and shadows on sustainability rating scoring

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Review of Managerial Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many organizations currently publish sustainability ratings that quantify the sustainability of firms by aggregating scores. These organizations analyze companies in economic, social, environmental and corporate governance terms. However, some of these scores are associated with problems of how positive and negative assessments are offset. This work proposes a methodology for using fuzzy logic in the design of a comprehensive sustainability rating for firms. This technique for measuring sustainability addresses the complexity of the concept and enables the incorporation of expert knowledge into the system of assessment. This approach is applied to organizational information taken from the 2008 Accountability Rating and corrects one of the weaknesses revealed by methodologies based on the aggregation of scores—the offset effect—enabling decision-maker to manage it. This is considered an important research topic because of the growth of social responsible financial markets, and the fact that investors are demanding more accurate information.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Atkinson G (2000) Measuring corporate sustainability. J Environ Plan Manag 43(2):235–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bebbington J (2001) Sustainable development: a review of the international development business and accounting literature. Acc Forum 25(2):128–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belu C (2009) Ranking corporations based on sustainable and socially responsible practices: a data envelopment analysis (DEA) approach. Sustain Dev 17(4):257–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonn I, Fisher J (2005) Corporate governance and business ethics: insights from the strategic planning experience. Corp Gov 13(6):730–738

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan FTS, Qi HJ, Chan HK, Lau HCW, Ip RWL (2003) A conceptual model of performance measurement for supply chains. Manag Decis 41(7):635–642

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chatterji A, Levine D (2006) Breaking down the wall of codes: evaluating non-financial performance measurement. Calif Manage Rev 48(2):29–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chelli M, Gendron Y (2013) Sustainability ratings and de disciplinary power of the ideology of numbers. J Bus Ethics 112:187–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cherchye L, Kuosmanen T (2004) Benchmarking sustainable development: a synthetic meta-index approach. In: McGillivray M, Clarke M (eds) Perspectives on human development. United Nations University Press, Tokyo

    Google Scholar 

  • Delmas M, Doctori Blass V (2010) Measuring corporate environmental performance: the trade-offs of sustainability ratings. Bus Strateg Environ 19(4):245–260

    Google Scholar 

  • Eccles NS, Pillay V, De Jongh D (2009) Correlates of corporate accountability among South Africa’s largest listed companies’ Southern. Afr Bus Rev 13(1):21–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein MJ, Manzoni J-F (2006) Performance measurement and management control: improving organizations and society. JAI Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Escrig E, Muñoz MJ, Fernández A (2010) socially responsible investing: sustainability indices, ESG rating and information provider agencies. Int J Sustain Econ 2(4):442–461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (EC) (2002) Communication from the commission, concerning corporate social responsibility: a business contribution to sustainable development. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2002:0347:FIN:EN:PDF. Accessed 08 Jan 2013

  • Fassin Y (2009) The stakeholder model refined. J Bus Ethics 84(1):113–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrero I, Fernández MA, Muñoz MJ (2009) A proposal for corporate governance rating in Spanish saving banks. In: Angela C (ed) New frontiers in insurance and bank risk management. McGraw-Hill, Milano, pp 175–189

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferri G, Liu L (2005) Assessing the effort of rating agencies in emerging economies: some empirical evidence. Eur J Financ 11(3):283–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finch N (2004) International rating agencies and sustainability. Macquarie Graduate School of Management, Project No. 952

  • Fray AM (2007) Ethical behavior and social responsibility in organizations: process and evaluation. Manag Decis 45(1):76–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graafland JJ, Eijffinger SCW, Smid H (2004) Benchmarking of corporate social responsibility: methodological problems and robustness. J Bus Ethics 53(1–2):137–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jang J-SR (1993) ANFIS: adaptative-network-based fuzzy inference system. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 23(3):665–685

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jang J-SR, Sun C-T (1995) Neuro-fuzzy modelling and control. Proc IEEE 83(3):378–406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kinderytė L (2008) Analysis and comparison of methodologies for corporate sustainability assessment. Environ Res Eng Manag 46(4):66–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleine A, Von Hauff M (2009) Sustainability-driven implementation of corporate social responsibility: application of the integrative sustainability triangle. J Bus Ethics 85(3):517–533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kouikoglou VS, Phillis YA (2011) Application of a fuzzy hierarchical model to the assessment of corporate social and environmental sustainability. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 18:209–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krajnc D, Glavič P (2005) How to compare companies on relevant dimensions of sustainability. Ecol Econ 55(4):551–563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee CC (1990) Fuzzy logic in control systems: fuzzy logic controller, part II. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 20(2):419–435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin H-Y, Hsu P-Y, Sheen G-J (2007) A fuzzy-based decision-making procedure for data warehouse system selection. Expert Syst Appl 32(3):939–953

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu KFR (2007) evaluating environmental sustainability: an integration of multiple-criteria decision- making and fuzzy logic. Environ Manag 39(5):721–736

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • López MV, Garcia A, Rodriguez L (2007) Sustainable development and corporate performance: a study based on the Dow Jones sustainability index. J Bus Ethics 75(3):285–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez F, Domínguez M, Fernández P (2005) El análisis evolvente de datos en la construcción de indicadores sintéticos: una aplicación a las provincias españolas. Estudios de Economía Aplicada 23(3):753–771

    Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams A, Siegel DS, Wright PM (2006) Corporate social responsibility: strategic implications. J Manag Stud 43(1):1–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moneva JM, Rivera JM, Muñoz MJ (2007) The corporate stakeholder commitment and social and financial performance. Ind Manag Data Syst 107(1):84–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munda G, Nardo M (2009) Noncompensatory/nonlinear composite indicators for ranking countries: a defensible setting. Appl Econ 41(12):1513–1523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munda G, Nijkamp P, Rietveld P (1994) Fuzzy multigroup conflict resolution for environmental management. In: Weiss J (ed) The economics of project appraisal and the environment. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 161–183

    Google Scholar 

  • Muñoz MJ, Rivera JM, Moneva JM (2008) Evaluating sustainability in organizations with a fuzzy logic approach. Ind Manage Data Syst 108(6):829–841

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muñoz MJ, Fernández MA, Nieto L, Rivera JM, Escrig E, León R (2009) SMEs and corporate social responsibility. The perspective from Spanish companies. Int J Sustain Econ 1(3):270–288

    Google Scholar 

  • Pedrycz W (1994) Why triangular membership functions? Fuzzy Sets Syst 64(1):21–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pena JB (1977) Problemas de la medición del bienestar y conceptos afines. Una aplicación al caso español, INE, Madrid

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillis YA, Andriantiatsaholiniaina LA (2001) Sustainability: an ill-defined concept and its assessment using fuzzy logic. Ecol Econ 37(3):435–456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillis YA, Davis BJ (2009) Assessment of corporate sustainability via fuzzy logic. J Intell Robot Syst 55(1):3–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter ME, Kramer MR (2006) Strategy and society: the link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harv Bus Rev 84(12):78–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Rivera JM, Muñoz MJ (2009) The effectiveness of the public support policies for the European industry financing as a contribution to sustainable development. J Bus Ethics 94(4):489–515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruf BM, Muralidhar K, Paul K (1998) The development of a systematic, aggregate measure of corporate social performance. J Manag 24(1):119–133

    Google Scholar 

  • Salvati L, Zitti M (2009) Substitutability and weighting of ecological and economic indicators: exploring the importance of various components of a synthetic index. Ecol Econ 68(4):1093–1099

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schäfer H (2005) International corporate social responsibility rating systems: conceptual outline and empirical results. J Corp Citizensh 20:107–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schäfer H, Beer J, Zenker J, Fernandes P (2006) Who is who in corporate social responsibility rating? A survey of internationally established rating systems that measure corporate social responsibility. Bertelsmann-Stiftung, Gütersloh

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuler DA, Cording M (2006) A corporate social performance-corporate financial performance behavioral model for consumers. Acad Manag Rev 31(3):540–559

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro AF (2004) Fuzzy logic in insurance. Insur Math Econ 35(2):399–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharp Z, Zaidman N (2009) Strategization of CSR. J Bus Ethics 93(1):51–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh RK, Murty HR, Gupta SK, Dikshit AK (2009) An overview of sustainability assessment methodologies. Ecol Econ 9(2009):189–212

    Google Scholar 

  • Székely F, Knirsch M (2005) Responsible leadership and corporate social responsibility: metrics for sustainable performance. Eur Manag J 23(6):628–647

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Timperley S (2008) Corporate social responsibility indexes: measure for measure. Dissertation, The University of Waikato

  • Vos R (2007) Perspective defining sustainability: a conceptual orientation. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 82:334–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock S (2008) Building a new institutional infrastructure for corporate responsibility. Acad Manag Perspect 22(3):87–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitehouse L (2006) Corporate social responsibility: views from the frontline. J Bus Ethics 63(3):279–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Windolph SE (2011) Assessing corporate sustainability through ratings: challenges and their causes. J Environ Sustain 1(1):61–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu W–W, Lee Y-T (2007) Developing global managers’ competencies using the fuzzy DEMATEL method. Expert Syst Appl 32(2):499–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8(3):338–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zarzosa P (1996) Aproximación a la medición del bienestar social. Idoneidad del indicador sintético “Distancia-P (2). Spanish. J Econ Financ 24(68):139–163

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors wish acknowledge the financial support received from projects P1•1B2010-13, P1.1B2013-31 and P1•1B2013-48 through the Universidad Jaume I and Sustainability and Corporate Social Responsibility Master Degree (UJI – UNED).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Finance and Accounting, University Jaume I, Campus de Riu Sec, Avda. Vicent Sos Baynat s/n, 12071, Castelló de la Plana, Castellón, Spain

    Elena Escrig-Olmedo, María Jesús Muñoz-Torres, María Ángeles Fernández-Izquierdo & Juana María Rivera-Lirio

Authors
  1. Elena Escrig-Olmedo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. María Jesús Muñoz-Torres
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. María Ángeles Fernández-Izquierdo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Juana María Rivera-Lirio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elena Escrig-Olmedo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Escrig-Olmedo, E., Muñoz-Torres, M.J., Fernández-Izquierdo, M.Á. et al. Lights and shadows on sustainability rating scoring. Rev Manag Sci 8, 559–574 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-013-0118-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-013-0118-0

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation