Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 107, Issue 4, pp 423–433 | Cite as

A Global Analysis of Corporate Social Performance: The Effects of Cultural and Geographic Environments

  • Foo Nin Ho
  • Hui-Ming Deanna Wang
  • Scott J. Vitell


As more and more multi-national companies expand their operations globally, their responsibilities extend beyond not only the economic motive of profitability but also other social and environmental factors. The objective of this article is to examine the impact of national culture and geographic environment on firms’ corporate social performance (CSP). Empirical tests are based on a global CSP database of companies from 49 countries. Results show that the Hofstede’s cultural dimensions are significantly associated with CSP. In addition, European companies are found to out-perform other regions and countries in CSP.


Corporate social performance Corporate social responsibility Cross-cultural comparison Hofstede cultural dimensions Cross regional comparison 


  1. Aguilera, R. V., & Jackson, G. (2010). Comparative and international corporate governance. The Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), 485–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Akaah, I. P. (1990). Attitudes of marketing professionals toward ethics in marketing research: A cross-national comparison. Journal of Business Ethics, 9(1), 45–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alas, R. (2006). Ethics in countries with different cultural dimensions. Journal of Business Ethics, 69, 237–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brammer, S., & Millington, A. (2006). Firm size, organizational visibility and corporate philanthropy: An empirical analysis. Business Ethics, Oxford, 15(1), 6–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brown, T. J., & Dacin, P. A. (1997). The company and the product: Corporate associations and consumer product responses. Journal of Marketing, 61(January), 68–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. The Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497–505.Google Scholar
  7. Clarkson, M. B. E. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 92–117.Google Scholar
  8. Cohen, J. R., Pant, L. W., & Sharp, D. J. (1996). A methodological note on cross-cultural accounting ethics research. International Journal of Accounting, 31(1), 55–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65–91.Google Scholar
  10. Donleavy, G. D., Lam, K.-C. J., & Ho, S. S. M. (2008). Does east meet west in business ethics: An introduction to the special issue. Journal of Business Ethics, 79, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ford, C. W., Nonis, S. A., & Hudson, G. I. (2005). A cross-cultural comparison of value systems and consumer ethics. Cross Cultural Management, 12(4), 36–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Franke, G. R., & Scott Nadler, S. (2008). Culture, economic development, and national ethical attitudes. Journal of Business Research, 61, 254–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Franklin, D. (2008). Just good business: A special report on corporate social responsibility. The Economist, 386(January), 3–6.Google Scholar
  14. Freedman, N., & Jaggi, B. (1982). Pollution disclosures, pollution performance, and economic performance. The International Journal of Management Science, 10, 167–176.Google Scholar
  15. Garcia-Castro, R., Arino, M. A., & Canela, M. A. (2010). Does social performance really lead to financial performance? Accounting for endogeneity. Journal of Business Ethics, 92(1), 107–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Harrison, L. E., & Huntington, S. P. (2000). Culture matters: How values shape human progress. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  17. Hill, R. Paul, Ainscough, T., Shank, T., & Manullang, D. (2007). Corporate social responsibility and socially responsible investing: A global perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 70(2), 165–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hofstede, Geert. (1984). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
  19. Hofstede, G. (1985). The interaction between national and organizational value systems. Journal of Management Studies, 22(4), 347–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
  21. Hofstede, G., & Bond, M. H. (1984). Hofstede’s culture dimensions: An independent validation using Rokeach’s value survey. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 15(4), 417–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Holden, N. (2002). Cross-cultural management—a knowledge management perspective. Harlow: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  23. House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P., & Gupta, V. (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  24. Husted, B. W. (2000). A contingency theory of corporate social performance. Business & Society, 39(March), 24–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Husted, B. W. (2005). Culture and ecology: A cross-national study of the determinants of environmental sustainability. Management International Review, 45(3), 349–371.Google Scholar
  26. Jurgens, M., Berthon, P., Papania, L., & Shabbir, H. A. (2010). Stakeholder theory and practice in Europe and North America: The key to success lies in a marketing approach. Industrial Marketing Management, 39, 769–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kashima, E., & Kashima, Y. (1998). Culture and language: The case of cultural dimensions and personal pronoun use. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 29, 461–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Laufer, W. S. (2003). Social screening of investment: An introduction. Journal of Business Ethics, 43(3), 163–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Licht, A. N., Goldschmidt, C., & Schwartz, S. H. (2007). Culture rules: The foundations of the rule of law and other norms of governance. Journal of Comparative Economics, 35(4), 659–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lu, L.-C., Rose, G. M., & Blodgett, J. G. (1999). The effects of cultural dimensions on ethical decision making in marketing: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Ethics, 18(January), 91–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Luo, X., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2006). Corporate social responsibility, customer satisfaction, and market value. Journal of Marketing, 70(October), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Maignan, I. (2001). Consumers’ perceptions of corporate social responsibilities: A cross-cultural comparison. Journal of Business Ethics, 30(March), 57–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Maignan, I., & Ferrell, O. C. (2003). Nature of corporate responsibilities perspectives from American, French, and German consumers. Journal of Business Research, 56, 55–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McElroy, K. M., & Siegfried, J. J. (1985). The effect of firm size on corporate philanthropy. Quarterly Review of Economics and Business, 25(2), 18–26.Google Scholar
  35. McSweeney, B. (2002). Hofstede’s model of national cultural differences and their consequences: A triumph of faith—a failure of analysis. Human Relations, 55(1), 89–118.Google Scholar
  36. O’Riordan, L., & Firbrass, J. (2008). Corporate social responsibility (CSR): Models and theories in stakeholder dialogue. Journal of Business Ethics, 83, 745–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Orlitzky, M. (2001). Does firm size confound the relationship between corporate social performance and firm financial performance? Journal of Business Ethics, 33(Sep), 167–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24(3), 403–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Park, H., Russell, C., & Lee, J. (2007). National culture and environmental sustainability: A cross-national analysis. Journal of Economics and Finance, 31(1), 104–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rallapalli, K., Vitell, S. J., Wiebe, F. A., & Barnes, J. H. (1994). Consumer ethical beliefs and personality traits: An exploratory analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 13, 487–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ringov, D., & Zollo, M. (2007). Corporate responsibility from a socio-institutional perspective: The impact of national culture on corporate social performance. Corporate Governance, 7(4), 476–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Scholtens, B., & Dam, L. (2007). Cultural values and international differences in business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 75, 273–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sen, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Korschun, D. (2006). The role of corporate social responsibility in strengthening multiple stakeholder relationships: A field experiment. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 158–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sethi, S. P. (1979). A conceptual framework for environmental analysis of social issues and evaluation of business response patterns. Academy of Management Review, 4(1), 63–74.Google Scholar
  45. Simerly, R. L., & Li, M. (2000). Corporate social performance and multinationality, a longitudinal study. B > Quest, article available at
  46. Simga-Mugan, C., Daly, B. A., Onkal, D., & Kavut, L. (2005). The influence of nationality and gender on ethical sensitivity: An application of the issue-contingent model. Journal of Business Ethics, 57, 139–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sims, R. L., & Gegez, A. E. (2004). Attitudes towards business ethics: A five nation comparative study. Journal of Business Ethics, 50(3), 253–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sirmon, D. G., & Lane, P. J. (2004). A model of cultural differences and international alliance performance. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(4), 306–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Smith, N. C. (2009). Bounded goodness: Marketing implications of Drucker on corporate responsibility. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 37(1), 73–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sotorrio, L., Luna, J., & Sanchez, L. F. (2008). Corporate social responsibility of the most highly reputed European and North American firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 82, 379–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Srnka, K. J. (2004). Culture’s role in marketers’ ethical decision making: An integrated theoretical framework. Academy of Marketing Science Review, 2004, 1.Google Scholar
  52. 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(Jan), 195–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tabellini, G. (2008). The scope of cooperation: Values and incentives. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 123(3), 905–950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Tan, J., & Chow, I. H.-S. (2009). Isolating cultural and national influence on value and ethics: A test of competing hypotheses. Journal of Business Ethics, 88(Apr), 197–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Turker, D. (2009). Measuring corporate social responsibility: A scale development study. Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 411–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Udayasankar, K. (2007). Corporate social responsibility and firm size. Journal of Business Ethics, 83, 167–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Ullman, A. (1985). Data in search of a theory: A critical examination of the relationships among social performance, social disclosure, and economic performance. Academy of Management Review, 10(3), 540–577.Google Scholar
  58. Vitell, S. J., & Festervand, T. A. (1987). Business ethics: Conflicts, practices and beliefs of industrial executives. Journal of Business Ethics, 6, 111–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Vitell, S. J., & Paolillo, J. G. P. (2004). A cross-cultural study of the antecedents of the perceived role of ethics and social responsibility. Business Ethics: A European Review, 23(April/July), 185–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Vlachos, P. A., Tsamakos, A., Vrechopoulos, A. P., & Avramidis, P. K. (2009). Corporate social responsibility: Attributions, loyalty, and the mediating role of trust. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 37, 170–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18(4), 303–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Wang, H.-m. D. (2010). Corporate social performance and financial-based brand equity. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 19(5), 335–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Wartick, S. L., & Cochran, P. L. (1985). The evolution of the corporate social performance model. Academy of Management Review, 10(4), 758–769.Google Scholar
  64. Wartick, S. L., & Mahon, J. F. (1994). Toward a substantive definition of the corporate issue construct: A review and synthesis of the literature. Business & Society, 33, 293–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Weaver, G. R. (2001). Ethics programs in global business: Culture’s role in managing ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 30(Mar), 3–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Whipple, T. W., & Swords, D. F. (1992). Business ethics judgments: A cross-cultural comparison. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(Sep), 671–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Wood, D. J. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16(4), 691–718.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Foo Nin Ho
    • 1
  • Hui-Ming Deanna Wang
    • 1
  • Scott J. Vitell
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of MarketingSan Francisco State UniversitySan FranciscoUSA
  2. 2.Department of MarketingUniversity of MississippiOxfordUSA

Personalised recommendations