Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 133, Issue 2, pp 279–291 | Cite as

When CEO Career Horizon Problems Matter for Corporate Social Responsibility: The Moderating Roles of Industry-Level Discretion and Blockholder Ownership

  • Won-Yong OhEmail author
  • Young Kyun Chang
  • Zheng Cheng


This paper examines the influence of CEO career horizon problems on corporate social responsibility (CSR). We assume that as CEOs are getting older, they tend to disengage in CSR due to their shorter career horizons. We further argue that high levels of industry-level discretion (ILD) and blockholder ownership amplify the negative effects of CEO age on CSR. Using a panel sample of US-based firms over 2004–2009, we do not find the main effect of CEO age on CSR, but find support for the moderating effects, such that CEO age is negatively associated with CSR when there are high levels of ILD and blockholder ownership. Therefore, results suggest that CEO career horizon problems matter for CSR when (1) CEOs have sufficient discretion over the firm’s strategic decisions and (2) outside blockholders put more pressure on CEOs to engage in financial earning management.


CEO age Career horizon problems CSR Industry-level discretion Blockholder ownership 


  1. Aguilera, R., Rupp, D., Williams, C., & 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
  2. Arora, P., & Dharwadkar, R. (2011). Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility (CSR): The moderating roles of attainment discrepancy and organization slack. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 19, 136–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barker, V. L., & Mueller, G. (2002). CEO characteristics and firm R&D spending. Management Science, 48, 782–801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barnea, A., & Rubin, A. (2010). corporate social responsibility as a conflict between shareholders. Journal of Business Ethics, 97, 71–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barron, J. M., Chulkov, D., & Waddell, G. R. (2010). Top management team turnover, CEO succession type, and strategic change. Journal of Business Research, 64, 904–910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baysinger, B., & Hoskisson, R. E. (1990). The composition of boards of directors and strategic control: Effects on corporate strategy. Academy of Management Review, 15, 72–87.Google Scholar
  7. Beasley, M. S. (1996). An empirical analysis of the relation between the board of director composition and financial statement fraud. Accounting Review, 71, 443–465.Google Scholar
  8. Boehm, A. (2005). The participation of businesses in community decision making. Business and Society, 44, 144–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bolton, P., Scheinkman, J. A., & Xiong, W. (2006). Pay for short-term performance: Executive compensation in speculative markets. Review of Economic Studies, 73, 577–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brickley, J. A., Lease, R. C., & Smith, C. W. (1988). Ownership structure and voting on antitakeover amendments. Journal of Financial Economics, 20, 267–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Buchholtz, A. K., & Ribbens, B. A. (1994). Role of Chief Executive Officers in takeover resistance: Effects of CEO incentives and individual characteristics. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 554–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Burke, L., & Logsdon, J. M. (1996). How corporate social responsibility pays off. Long Range Planning, 29, 495–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Carpenter, M. A., Geletkanycz, M. A., & Sanders, W. G. (2004). Upper echelons research revisited: Antecedents, elements and consequences of top management team composition. Journal of Management, 30, 749–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chang, Y. K., Oh, W. Y., Jung, J. C., & Lee, J. Y. (2012). Firm size and corporate social performance: The mediating role of outside director representation. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 19, 486–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chang, Y. K., Oh, W. Y., & Messersmith, J. G. (2013). Translating corporate social performance into financial performance: Exploring the moderating role of high-performance work practices. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24, 3738–3756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Coad, A., & Rao, R. (2008). Innovation and firm growth in high-tech sectors: A quantile regression approach. Research Policy, 37, 633–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cohen, P., Cohen, J., West, S. J., & Aiken, L. S. (2002). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Lawrence Earlbaum.Google Scholar
  18. Davidson, W. N., Xie, B., & Ning, Y. (2007). The influence of executive age, career horizon and incentives on pre-turnover earnings management. Journal of Management and Governance, 11, 45–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dawkins, J., & Lewis, S. (2003). CSR in stakeholder expectations and their implications for company strategy. Journal of Business Ethics, 44, 185–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dechow, P., & Sloan, R. (1991). Executive incentives and the horizon problem. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 14, 51–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 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
  22. Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Oxford: Capstone.Google Scholar
  23. Epstein, M. (2008). Making sustainability work. Best practices in managing and measuring corporate social, environmental and economical impacts. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koheler Publishers and Greenleaf Publishing.Google Scholar
  24. Fahlenbrach, R., & Stulz, R. (2011). Bank CEO incentives and the credit crisis. Journal of Financial Economics, 99, 11–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26, 301–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Finkelstein, S., & Boyd, B. K. (1998). How much does the CEO matter? The Role of Managerial Discretion in the Setting of CEO Compensation. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 179–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Finkelstein, S., & Hambrick, D. C. (1990). Top-management-team tenure and organizational outcomes: The moderating role of managerial discretion. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 484–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Godfrey, P. C., Merrill, C. B., & Hansen, J. M. (2009). The relationship between corporate social responsibility and shareholder value: An empirical test of the risk management hypothesis. Strategic Management Journal, 30, 425–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gray, S. R., & Cannella, A. A. (1997). The role of risk in executive compensation. Journal of Management, 23, 517–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Griffin, J. J., & Mahon, J. E. (1997). The corporate social performance and corporate financial performance debate: Twenty-five years of incomparable research. Business and Society, 36, 5–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Grimm, C. M., & Smith, K. G. (1991). Management and organizational change: A note on the railroad industry. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 557–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Guthrie, K., & Sokolowsky, J. (2010). Large shareholders and the pressure to manage earnings. Journal of Corporate Finance, 16, 302–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Haleblian, J., & Finkelstein, S. (1993). Top management team size, CEO dominance, and firm performance: The moderating roles of environmental turbulence and discretion. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 844–863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hambrick, D. C. (2007). Upper echelons theory: An update. Academy of Management Reivew, 32, 334–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hambrick, D. C., & Abrahamson, E. (1995). Assessing managerial discretion across industries: A multi-method approach. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 1427–1441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hambrick, D. C., & Finkelstein, S. (1987). Managerial discretion: A bridge between polar views of organizational outcomes. Research in Organizational Behavior, 9, 369–406.Google Scholar
  37. Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. (1984). Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9, 193–206.Google Scholar
  38. Henderson, A. D., Miller, D., & Hambrick, D. C. (2006). How quickly do CEOs become obsolete? Industry dynamism, CEO tenure, and company performance. Strategic Management Journal, 27, 447–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Herrmann, P., & Datta, D. K. (2002). CEO successor characteristics and the choice of foreign market entry mode: An empirical study. Journal of International Business Studies, 33, 551–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hox, J. J. (2010). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications (2nd ed.). Routledge: New York.Google Scholar
  41. 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
  42. Kacperczyk, A. (2009). With greater power comes greater responsibility? Takeover protection and corporate attention to stakeholders. Strategic Management Journal, 30, 261–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kaplan, S. N., & Minton, B. A. (2012). How has CEO turnover changed? International Review of Finance, 12, 57–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Keats, B. W., & Hitt, M. A. (1988). A causal model of linkages among environmental dimensions, macro organizational characteristics, and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 570–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Keegan, J., & Kabanoff, B. (2008). Indirect industry and subindustry-level managerial discretion measurement. Organizational Research Methods, 11, 682–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kumar, P., & Rabinovitch, R. (2011). CEO entrenchment and corporate risk management. SSRN 1760201.Google Scholar
  47. Lawrence, B. S. (1997). The black box of organizational demographics. Organization Science, 8, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Levesque, M., & Minniti, M. (2006). The effect of aging on entrepreneurial behavior. Journal of Business Venturing, 21, 177–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Liberson, S., & O’Connor, J. F. (1972). Leadership and organizational performance: A study of large corporations. American Sociological Review, 37, 117–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Mahapatra, S. (1984). Investor reaction to a corporate social accounting. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 11, 29–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Mahoney, L. S., & Thorn, L. (2006). An examination of the structure of executive compensation and corporate social responsibility: A Canadian investigation. Journal of Business Ethics, 69, 149–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Manner, M. (2010). The impact of CEO characteristics on corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 93, 53–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Matta, E., & Beamish, P. W. (2008). The accentuated CEO career horizon problem: Evidence from international acquisitions. Strategic Management Journal, 29, 683–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Mattingly, J. E., & Berman, S. L. (2006). Measurement of corporate social action: Discovering taxonomy in the Kinder Lydenburg Domini ratings data. Business and Society, 45, 20–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. McClelland, P. L., Barker, V. L., & Oh, W. Y. (2012). CEO career horizon and tenure: Future performance implications under different contingencies. Journal of Business Research, 65, 1387–1393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. McGuire, J., Dow, S., & Argheyd, K. (2003). CEO incentives and corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 45, 341–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. McWilliam, A., & Siegel, D. (2000). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: Correlation or misspecification? Strategic Management Journal, 21, 603–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 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
  59. Neter, J., Wasserman, W., & Kutner, M. H. (1985). Applied linear statistical models. Homewood, IL: Irwin.Google Scholar
  60. Oh, W. Y., Chang, Y. K., & Martynov, A. (2011). The effect of ownership structure on corporate social responsibility: Empirical evidence from Korea. Journal of Business Ethics, 104, 283–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organizational Studies, 24, 403–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Rabe-Hesketh, S., & Skrondal, A. (2005). Multilevel and longitudinal modeling using stata. College Station, TX: Stata Press.Google Scholar
  63. Rajagopalan, N., & Datta, D. K. (1996). CEO characteristics: Does industry matter? Academy of Management Journal, 39, 125–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Rodriquez, P., Siegel, D. S., Hillman, A., & Eden, L. (2006). Three lenses on the multinational enterprise: Politics, corruption, and corporate social responsibility. Journal of International Business Studies, 37, 733–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Society for Human Resource Management. (2007). Corporate social responsibility in United States, Australia, India, China, Canada, Mexico and Brazil: A pilot study. Alexandria, VA: Society for Human Resource Management.Google Scholar
  66. Stanwick, P., & Stanwick, S. (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
  67. Udayasankar, K. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and firm size. Journal of Business Ethics, 83, 167–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Veiga, J. F. (1983). Mobility influences during managerial career stages. Academy of Management Journal, 26, 64–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance–financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 303–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Wang, H., Choi, J., & Li, J. (2008). Too Little or Too Much? Untangling the relationship between corporate philanthropy and Firm Financial Performance. Organization Science, 19, 143–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Ward, A., Sonnenfeld, J. A., & Kimberly, J. R. (1995). In search of a kingdom: Determinants of subsequent career outcomes for chief executives who are fired. Human Resource Management, 34, 117–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Haskayne School of BusinessUniversity of CalgaryCalgaryCanada
  2. 2.College of Business & EconomicsUniversity of Wisconsin-WhitewaterWhitewaterUSA
  3. 3.School of BusinessUniversity of KansasLawrenceUSA

Personalised recommendations