Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Measuring Corporate Social Responsibility: A Scale Development Study

Abstract

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is one of the most prominent concepts in the literature and, in short, indicates the positive impacts of businesses on their stakeholders. Despite the growing body of literature on this concept, the measurement of CSR is still problematic. Although the literature provides several methods for measuring corporate social activities, almost all of them have some limitations. The purpose of this study is to provide an original, valid, and reliable measure of CSR reflecting the responsibilities of a business to various stakeholders. Based on a proposed conceptual framework of CSR, a scale was developed through a systematic scale development process. In the study, exploratory factor analysis was conducted to determine the underlying factorial structure of the scale. Data was collected from 269 business professionals working in Turkey. The results of the analysis provided a four-dimensional structure of CSR, including CSR to social and nonsocial stakeholders, employees, customers, and government.

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

We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abbreviations

CEP:

Council of Economic Priorities

CSID:

Canadian Social Investment Database

CSR:

Corporate social responsibility

EU:

European Union

KLD:

Kinder, Lydenberg, and Domini

NGO:

Nongovernmental organization

PRESOR:

Perceived Role of Ethics and Social Responsibility

WCED:

World Commission on Environment and Development

References

  1. Abbott W. F., R. J. Monsen 1979. On the Measurement of Corporate Social Responsibility: Self-Reported Disclosures as a Method of Measuring Corporate Social Involvement. Academy of Management Journal, 22(3), 501–515

  2. Ararat, M.: 2004, ‹Social Responsibility in a State Dependent System’, in A. Habisch, J. Jonker, M. Wegner and R. Schmidpeter (eds.), Corporate Social Responsibility Across Europe (Springer-Verlag, Berlin), Chapter 19, pp. 247–261

  3. Ararat, M.: 2005, ‹Drivers for Corporate Social Responsibility, Case of Turkey’, Working Paper. (Available at: http://info.worldbank.org/etools/mdfdb/docs/WP_UJRC5.pdf)

  4. Ararat, M.: 2006, ‹Corporate Social Responsibility Across Middle East and North Africa’, Working Paper. (Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1015925)

  5. Aupperle K. E.: 1984. An Empirical Measure of Corporate Social Orientation. In L. E. Preston (Eds.), Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy Vol. 6, pp. 27–54. Greenwich, CT: JAI

  6. Bagozzi R. P., Y. Yi, L. W. Phillips: 1991. Assessing Construct Validity in Organizational Research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(3), 421–458

  7. Bayiksel, S. Ö.: 2007, ‹Hızlı Büyüyen Daha Çok Begeniliyor’, Capital Magazine. (Available at: http://www.capital.com.tr/haber.aspx?HBR_KOD=%204509)

  8. Baucus M. S., D. A. Baucus: 1997. Paying the Piper: An Empirical Examination of Longer-Term Financial Consequences of Illegal Corporate Behavior. Academy of Management Journal 40(1). 129–151

  9. Bragdon J. H., J. A. Marlin: 1972. Is Pollution Profitable?. Risk Management, 19, 9–18

  10. Bowen H. R.: 1953. Social Responsibilities of the Businessman. Harper & Row, New York

  11. Bugra A.: 2003. The Place of the Economy in Turkish Society. The South Atlantic Quarterly, 102(2/3), 453–470

  12. Carroll A. B.: 1979. A Three Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Social Performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497–505

  13. Carroll A. B.: 1991. The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48

  14. Carroll A. B.: 1999. Corporate Social Responsibility – Evolution of a Definitional Construct. Business & Society, 38(3), 268–295

  15. Carroll A. B.: 2000. A Commentary and an Overview of Key Questions on Corporate Social Performance Measurement. Business & Society, 39(4), 466–478

  16. Charkham J.: 1994. Keeping Good Company: A Study of Corporate Governance in Five Countries. Claredon, Oxford

  17. Chen K. H., R. W. Metcalf: 1984, The Relationship Between Pollution Control Record and Financial Indicators Revisited. The Accounting Review, 55, 168–177

  18. Clarkson, M. B. E.: 1994. ‹A Risk Based Model of Stakeholder Theory’, in Proceedings of the Second Toronto Conference on Stakeholder Theory (Centre for Corporate Social Performance & Ethics University of Toronto, Toronto)

  19. Clarkson M. B. E.: 1995. A Stakeholder Framework for Analyzing and Evaluating Corporate Social Performance. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 92–117

  20. Cortina J. M.: 1993, What is Coefficient Alpha? An Examination of Theory and Applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98–104

  21. Daft R. L.: 2003, Management. Thomson South-Western, USA

  22. Davidson, W. N. and D. L. Worrell: 1990, ‹A Comparison and Test of the Use of Accounting and Stock Market Data in Relating Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance’, Akron Business and Economic Review 21, 7–19. (Cited in Maignan and Ferrell, 2000)

  23. Davis K.: 1960. Can Business Afford to Ignore Social Responsibilities? California Management Review, 2(3), 70–76

  24. Davis K.: 1973. The Case for and Against Business Assumption of Social Responsibilities. Academy of Management Journal, 16(2), 312–322

  25. Dawkins D., S. Lewis: 2003. CSR in Stakeholder Expectations: and Their Implication for Company Strategy. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(2/3), 185–193

  26. Eells R., C. Walton: 1974, Conceptual Foundations of Business (3rd ed.). Irwin, Burr Ridge, IL

  27. Etheredge J. M.: 1999. The Perceived Role of Ethics and Social Responsibility: An Alternative Scale Structure. Journal of Business Ethics 18, 51–64

  28. Flam H.: 2004. Turkey and the EU: Politics and Economics of Accession. CESifo Economic Studies 50(1), 171–210

  29. Freedman N., B. Jaggi: 1982, Pollution Disclosures, Pollution Performance, and Economic Performance. The International Journal of Management Science, 10, 167–176

  30. Freedman M., C. Wasley: 1990. The Association Between Environmental Performance and Environmental Disclosure in Annual Reports and 10-Ks. Advances in Public Interest Accounting, 3, 183–193

  31. Freeman R. E.: 1984, Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Pitman, Boston

  32. Gray R., R. Kouhy, S. Lavers: 1995. Corporate Social and Environmental Reporting: A Review of the Literature and a Longitudinal Study of UK Disclosure. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 8(2), 47–77

  33. Greenwood M. R.: 2001. The Importance of Stakeholders According to Business Leaders. Business and Society Review, 106(1), 29–49

  34. Hair J. F., W. C. Black R. E. Anderson R L. Tatham: 2006. Multivariate Data Analysis, 6th ed. Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey

  35. Hosftede G.: 1980. Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA

  36. Ingram R., K. Frazier: 1980. Environmental Performance and Corporate Disclosure. Journal of Accounting Research, 18(2), 614–622

  37. Kongar, E.: 1999. 21. Yüzyılda Türkiye: 2000li Yıllarda Türkiye’nin Toplumsal Yapısı. Remzi Kitabı, Istanbul

  38. Mahoney L. S., L. Thorne: 2005. Corporate Social Responsibility and Long-Term Compensation: Evidence from Canada. Journal of Business Ethics, 57(3), 241–253

  39. Maignan I., O. C. Ferrell: 2000. Measuring Corporate Citizenship in Two Countries: The Case of the United States and France. Journal of Business Ethics, 23(3), 283–297

  40. Maignan I., O. C. Ferrell: 2004. Corporate Social Responsibility and Marketing: An Integrative Framework. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 32(1), 3–19

  41. McGuire J. W.: 1963. Business and Society. McGraw-Hill, New York.

  42. McGuire J. B., A. Sundgren, T. Schneeweis: 1988. Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Financial Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 854–872

  43. Orpen C.: 1987. The Attitudes of United States and South African Managers to Corporate Social Responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 6(2), 89–96

  44. Ostlund L. E.: 1977. Attitudes of Managers Towards Corporate Social Responsibility. California Management Review, 19(4), 35–49

  45. Peterson D. K.: 2004, The Relationship Between Perceptions of Corporate Citizenship and Organizational Commitment. Business and Society, 43(3), 296–319

  46. Quazi A. M., D. O’Brien: 2000, An Empirical Test of a Cross-National Model of Corporate Social Responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 25, 33–51

  47. Rockness J. W. 1985, An Assessment of the Relationship Between US Corporate Environmental Performance and Disclosure. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 12(3), 339–354

  48. Ruf B. M., K. Muralidhar, K. Paul: 1998. The Development of a Systematic, Aggregate Measure of Corporate Social Performance. Journal of Management, 24(1), 119–133

  49. Sims R. R.: 2003. Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility: Why Giants Fall. Praeger, USA

  50. Singhapakdi A., S. J. Vitell, K. C. Rallapalli, K. L. Kraft: 1996. The Perceived Role of Ethics and Social Responsibility: A Scale Development. Journal of Business Ethics, 15, 1131–1140

  51. Smith D. 1993. The Frankenstein Syndrome: Corporate Responsibility and the Environment. In: D. Smith (ed) Business and the Environment: Implications of the New Environmentalism. Paul Chapman, London, pp. 172–189

  52. Smith, W. J. and R. S. Blackburn: 1988, ‹CSR: A Psychometric Examination of A Measurement Instrument’, Proceedings of the Southern Management Association, 293–295

  53. Votaw D.: 1972 Genius Became Rare: A Comment on the Doctrine of Social Responsibility. California Management Review, 15(2):25–31

  54. Verdeyen V., J. Put, B. V. Buggenhout: 2004. A Social Stakeholder Model. International Journal of Social Welfare, 13, 325–331

  55. Waddock S. A., Graves S. B.: 1997. The Corporate Social Performance – Financial Performance Link. Strategic Management Journal, 18(4), 303–319

  56. Wheeler D., M. Sillanpaa: 1997. The Stakeholder Corporation: A Blueprint for Maximazing Stakeholder Value. Pitman, London

  57. Wheeler D., M. Sillanpaa: 1998, Including the Stakeholders: The Business Case. Long Range Planning, 31(2), 201–210

  58. Wherther W. B., D. Chandler: 2006. Responsibility: Stakeholders in a Global Environment. Sage, USA

  59. Wiseman J.: 1982. An Evaluation of Environmental Disclosures Made in Corporate Annual Reports’, Accounting, Organizations, and Society, 7(l), 53–63

  60. Wolfe, R. and K. Aupperle: 1991, ‹Introduction to Corporate Social Performance: Methods for Evaluating an Elusive Construct’, in J. E. Post (ed.), Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy, Vol. 12 (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), pp. 265–268

  61. Wood D. J., R. E. Jones: 1995. Stakeholder Mismatching: A Theoretical Problem in Empirical Research on Corporate Social Performance. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 3, 229–267

  62. World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED): 1987. Our Common Future. Oxford University Press, Oxford

Download references

Acknowledgement

This article is mainly based on the unpublished master dissertation of the author. The author is grateful to Prof. Ömür N. Timurcanday Özmen, Dokuz Eylül University, for her constant support and advice throughout this process and Dr. Oyvind Ihlen, University of Oslo, for his valuable comments and suggestions.

Author information

Correspondence to Duygu Turker.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Turker, D. Measuring Corporate Social Responsibility: A Scale Development Study. J Bus Ethics 85, 411–427 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9780-6

Download citation

Keywords

  • Corporate social responsibility
  • employees
  • scale development
  • stakeholders
  • Turkey