Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 104, Issue 2, pp 283–297 | Cite as

The Effect of Ownership Structure on Corporate Social Responsibility: Empirical Evidence from Korea

  • Won Yong OhEmail author
  • Young Kyun Chang
  • Aleksey Martynov


Relatively little research has examined the effects of ownership on the firms’ corporate social responsibility (CSR). In addition, most of it has been conducted in the Western context such as the U.S. and Europe. Using a sample of 118 large Korean firms, we hypothesize that different types of shareholders will have distinct motivations toward the firm’s CSR engagement. We break down ownership into different groups of shareholders: institutional, managerial, and foreign ownerships. Results indicate a significant, positive relationship between CSR ratings and ownership by institutions and foreign investors. In contrast, shareholding by top managers is negatively associated with firm’s CSR rating while outside director ownership is not significant. We conclude that different owners have differential impacts on the firm’s CSR engagement.


Ownership structure Corporate social responsibility Korea 


  1. Admati, A. R., Pfleiderer, P., & Zechner, J. (1994). Large shareholder activism, risk sharing, and financial market equilibrium. The Journal of Political Economy, 102, 1097–1130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agle, B. R., Mitchell, R. K., & Sonnenfeld, J. A. (1999). Who matters to CEOs? An investigation of stakeholder attributes and salience, corporate performance, and CEO values. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 507–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aguilera, R. V., Rupp, D. E., Williams, C. A., & 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Albrecht, C., Turnbull, C., Zhang, Y., & Skousen, C. J. (2010). The relationship between South Korean Chaebols and Fraud. Management Research Review, 33, 257–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baek, J. S., Kang, J. K., & Park, K. S. (2004). Corporate governance and firm value: Evidence from the Korean financial crisis. Journal of Financial Economics, 71, 265–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bailey, W., & Jagtiani, J. (1994). Foreign ownership restrictions and stock prices in the Thai capital market. Journal of Financial Economics, 36, 57–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barnea, A., & Rubin, A. (2010). Corporate social responsibility as a conflict between shareholders. Journal of Business Ethics, 97, 71–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Baysinger, B. D., Kosnik, R. D., & Turk, T. A. (1991). Effects of board and ownership structure on corporate R&D strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 205–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Belal, A. R. (2001). A study of corporate social disclosures in Bangladesh. Managerial Auditing Journal, 16, 274–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Boehm, A. (2005). The participation of businesses in community decision making. Business & Society, 44, 144–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Boyd, B. K. (1994). Board control and CEO compensation. Strategic Management Journal, 15, 335–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brancato, C. K. (1997). Institutional investors and corporate governance: beat practices for increasing corporate value. Chicago, IL: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  13. Brickley, J. A., Lease, R. C., & Smith, C. W. Jr. (1988). Ownership structure and voting on antitakeover amendments. Journal of Financial Economics, 20, 267–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bushee, B. (1998). The influence of institutional investors on myopic R&D investment behavior. The Accounting Review, 73, 305–333.Google Scholar
  15. Campbell, J. L. (2007). Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32, 946–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 4, 497–505.Google Scholar
  17. Chaganti, R., & Damanpour, F. (1991). Institutional ownership, capital structure, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 479–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Chang, S. J. (2003). Ownership structure, expropriation and performance of group-affiliated companies in Korea. Academy of Management Journal, 46, 238–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Chang, S. J., & Hong, J. (2000). Economic performance of group-affiliated companies in Korea: Intragroup resource sharing and internal business transaction. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 429–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Chapple, W., & Moon, J. (2005). Corporate social responsibility in Asia: A seven country study of CSR website reporting. Business and Society, 44, 415–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Chen, G. M., Lee, B. S., & Rui, O. (2001). Foreign ownership restrictions and market segmentation in China’s stock markets. Journal of Financial Research, 24, 133–156.Google Scholar
  22. Cho, D. S., & Kim, J. T. (2007). Outside directors, ownership structures and firm profitability in Korea. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15, 239–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Choi, S., & Aguilera, R. V. (2009). CSR dynamics in South Korea and Japan: A comparative analysis. In C. A. Mallin (Ed.), Corporate social responsibility: A case study approach (pp. 123–147). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  24. Choi, J. J., Park, S. W., & Yoo, S. S. (2007). The value of outside directors: Evidence from corporate governance reform in Korea. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 42, 941–962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Claessens, S., Djankov, S., & Lang, L. P. H. (2000). The separation of ownership and control in East Asian corporations. Journal of Financial Economics, 58, 81–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Cochran, P. L., & Wood, R. A. (1984). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 27, 42–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Davis, G. F., & Kim, E. H. (2007). Business ties and proxy voting by mutual funds. Journal of Financial Economics, 85, 552–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Davis, J. H., Schoorman, F. D., & Donaldson, L. (1997). Toward a stewardship theory of management. Academy of Management Review, 22, 20–47.Google Scholar
  29. Dawkins, J., & Lewis, S. (2003). CSR in stakeholder expectations and their implications for company strategy. Journal of Business Ethics, 44, 185–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Denis, D. J., Denis, D. K., & Sarin, A. (1997). Agency problems, equity ownership, and corporate diversification. The Journal of Finance, 52, 135–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 1, 57–74.Google Scholar
  33. Eisenmann, T. R. (2002). The effects of CEO equity ownership and firm diversification on risk taking. Strategic Management Journal, 23, 513–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Falck, O., & Heblich, S. (2007). Corporate social responsibility: Doing well by doing good. Business Horizons, 50, 247–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Fama, E. F. (1970). Efficient capital markets: A review of theory and empirical work. The Journal of Finance, 25, 383–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26, 301–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Finkelstein, S. (1992). Power in top management teams: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 505–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Fombrun, C., & Shanley, M. (1990). What’s in a name? Reputation building and corporate strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 233–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Fortune, (1993). What activist investors want. March, 8, 59–63.Google Scholar
  40. Gedajlovic, E. R., & Shapiro, D. M. (1998). Management and ownership effects: Evidence from five countries. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 533–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Gehrig, T. (1993). An information based explanation of the domestic bias in international equity investment. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 95, 97–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Graves, S. B., & Waddock, S. A. (1994). Institutional owners and corporate social performance. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 1034–1046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Greenaway, D., Guariglia, A., & Yu, Z. (2009). The more the better? Foreign ownership and corporate performance in China. Working Paper.Google Scholar
  44. Hackston, D., & Milne, M. J. (1996). Some determinants of social and environmental disclosures in New Zealand companies. Accounting Auditing and Accountability Journal, 9, 77–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Haggard, S., Lim, W. H., & Kim, E. S. (2003). Economic crisis and corporate restructuring in Korea: Reforming the Chaebol. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Hambrick, D. C., & Cannella, A. A. (2004). CEOs who have COOs: Contingency analysis of an unexplored structural form. Strategic Management Journal, 25, 959–979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Hambrick, D. C., & Jackson, E. M. (2000). Outside directors with a stake: The Linchpin in improving governance. California Management Review, 42, 108–127.Google Scholar
  48. Hart, O., & Moore, J. (1990). Property rights and the nature of the firm. Journal of Political Economy, 98, 1119–1158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Hillman, A. J., Shropshire, C., & Cannella, A. A. (2007). Organizational predictors of women on corporate boards. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 941–952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Hoskisson, R. E., Hitt, M. A., Johnson, R. A., & Grossman, W. (2002). Conflicting voices: The effects of institutional ownership heterogeneity and internal governance on corporate innovation strategies. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 697–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Jeon, J. Q., Lee, C., & Moffett, C. M. (2011). Effects of foreign ownership on payout policy: Evidence from Korean market. Journal of Financial Market, 14, 344–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Jones, M. T. (1999). The institutional determinants of social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 20, 163–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Kim, Y. (2005). Board network characteristics and firm performance in Korea. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 13, 800–808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Kim, Y. (2007). The proportion and social capital of outside directors and their impacts on firm value: Evidence from Korea. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15, 1168–1176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Kochhar, R., & David, P. (1996). Institutional investors and firm innovation: A test of competing hypotheses. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 73–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Kronborg, D., & Thomsen, S. (2009). Foreign ownership and long term survival. Strategic Management Journal, 30, 207–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Lee, M. D. P., & Lounsbury, M. (2011). Domesticating radical rant and rage: An exploration of the consequences of environmental shareholder resolutions on corporate environmental performance. Business & Society, 50, 155–188.Google Scholar
  60. Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 268–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). “Implicit” and “Explicit” CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33, 404–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. McConnell, J. J., & Servaes, H. (1990). Additional evidence on equity ownership and corporate value. Journal of Financial Economics, 27, 595–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. McWilliam, A., & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: Correlation or misspecification? Strategic Management Journal, 21, 603–609.Google Scholar
  64. Moon, I. (2006, May 3). Korea’s Chaebol syndrome persists. Business Week.Google Scholar
  65. Moore, G. (2001). Corporate social and financial performance: An investigation in the U.K. supermarket industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 34, 299–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Narayanan, M. P. (1985). Managerial incentives for short-term results. Journal of Finance, 40, 1469–1484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24, 403–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Pedersen, T., & Thomsen, S. (1997). European patterns of corporate ownership: A twelve-country study. Journal of International Business Studies, 28, 759–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Peng, M. W. (2003). Institutional transitions and strategic choices. Academy of Management Review, 28, 275–296.Google Scholar
  70. Pfeffer, J. (1973). Size, composition, and function of hospital boards of directors: A study of organization-environment linkage. Administrative Science Quarterly, 18, 349–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependent perspective. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  72. Pound, J. (1992). Beyond takeovers: Politics comes to corporate control. Harvard Business Review, 70, 83–93.Google Scholar
  73. Roberts, R. W. (1992). Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: An application of stakeholder theory. Accounting Organizations and Society, 17, 595–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Sanders, W. G., & Boivie, S. (2004). Sorting things out: Valuation of new firms in uncertain markets. Strategic Management Journal, 25, 167–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Schnatterly, K., Shaw, K. W., & Jennings, W. W. (2008). Information advantages of large institutional owners. Strategic Management Journal, 29, 219–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Sethi, S. P. (2005). Investing in socially responsible companies is a must for public pension funds—Because there is no better alternative. Journal of Business Ethics, 56, 99–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Shamsie, J. (2003). The context of dominance: An industry-driven framework for exploiting reputation. Strategic Management Journal, 24, 199–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Shleifer, A. (2000). Inefficient markets: An introduction to behavioral finance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  79. Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1997). A survey of corporate governance. The Journal of Finance, 52, 737–783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Siegel, D. S., & Vitaliano, D. F. (2007). An empirical analysis of the strategic use of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 16, 773–792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Smith, M. P. (1996). Shareholder activism by institutional investors: Evidence from CalPERS. The Journal of Finance, 51, 227–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Stanwick, P. A., & Stanwick, S. D. (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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Teoh, H. Y., & Shiu, G. Y. (1990). Attitudes towards corporate social responsibility and perceived importance of social responsibility information characteristics in a decision context. Journal of Business Ethics, 9, 71–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Vogel, D. (2005). The market for virtue: The potential and limits of corporate social responsibility. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.Google Scholar
  85. Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance—financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 303–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Welford, R. (2005). Corporate social responsibility in Europe, North America, and Asia. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 17, 33–52.Google Scholar
  87. Yoshikawa, T., Rasheed, A. A., & Del Brio, E. B. (2010). The impact of firm strategy and foreign ownership on executive bonus compensation in Japanese firms. Journal of Business Research, 63, 1254–1260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Zahra, S. A. (1996). Governance, ownership, and corporate entrepreneurship: The moderating impact of industry technological opportunities. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1713–1735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Won Yong Oh
    • 1
    Email author
  • Young Kyun Chang
    • 1
  • Aleksey Martynov
    • 1
  1. 1.School of BusinessUniversity of KansasLawrenceUSA

Personalised recommendations