Quality & Quantity

, Volume 50, Issue 6, pp 2553–2569 | Cite as

Corporate social responsibility and an enterprise’s operational efficiency: considering competitor’s strategies and the perspectives of long-term engagement

  • Shou-Lin Yang


This study employs an existing slacks-based measure-data envelopment analysis to calculate an enterprise’s operational efficiency. With Tobit and threshold regressions, the author analyses the effects of the corporate social responsibility (CSR) engagement of both a focal company and its competitors on its operational efficiency. Long-term CSR engagement plays an important role in corporate efficiency. A firm may enhance the effects of its short-term CSR engagement and decrease those of its competitor’s long-term CSR engagement on efficiency by increasing its own long-term CSR engagement. When a competitor’s long-term CSR engagement is high, its short-term CSR engagement will decrease corporate efficiency. However, when the competitor’s long-term CSR engagement is low, the firm’s long-term CSR engagement will improve its efficiency.


Corporate social responsibility Efficiency Slacks-based measure-data envelopment analysis (SBM-DEA) Competitor 


  1. Alafi, K., Hasoneh, A.B.: Corporate social responsibility associated with customer satisfaction and financial performance a case study with housing banks in Jordan. Int. J. Hum. Soc. Sci. 2(15), 102–115 (2012)Google Scholar
  2. Alexander, G.J., Buchholz, R.A.: Corporate social performance and stock market performance. Acad. Manag. J. 21, 479–486 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anginer, D., Fisher, K. L., & Statman, M. (2008). Stocks of admired companies and despised ones (Working Paper)Google Scholar
  4. Aupperle, K., Carroll, A., Hatfield, J.: An empirical examination of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and profitability. Acad. Manag. J. 28, 446–463 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Avkiran, N.K., Rowlands, T.: How to better identify the true managerial performance: state of the art using DEA. Omega 36, 317–324 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Banker, R.D., Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W.: Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Manag. Sci. 30(9), 1078–1092 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barnett, M.L., Salomon, R.M.: Beyond dichotomy: the curvilinear relationship between social responsibility and financial performance. Strategy Manag. J. 27, 1101–1122 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Baron, D.: Private politics, corporate social responsibility and integrated strategy. J. Econ. Manag. Strategy 10, 7–45 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barron, F.H., Barrett, B.E.: Decision quality using ranked attribute weights. Manag. Sci. 42, 1515–1523 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Becchetti, L., Trovato, G.: Corporate social responsibility and firm efficiency: a latent class stochastic frontier analysis. J. Prod. Anal. 36(3), 231–246 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Black, B., Hasung, J., Woochan, K.: Does corporate governance predict firms’ market values? Evidence from Korea. J. Law Econ. Org. 22(2), 366–413 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bowen, H.R.: Social Responsibilities of the Businessman. Harper and Row, New York (1953)Google Scholar
  13. Bragdon, H.H., Marlin, J.T.: Is pollution profitable? Risk Manag. 19(4), 9–18 (1972)Google Scholar
  14. Brammer, S., Brooks, C., Pavelin, S.: Corporate social performance and stock returns: UK evidence from disaggregate measures. Financ. Manag. 35, 97–116 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Brown, T.J., Dacin, P.A.: The company and the product: corporate associations and consumer product responses. J. Market. 61, 68–84 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Carlos, P.B.: Measuring efficiency in the hotel sector. Ann. Tour. Res. 32(2), 456–477 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Claessens, S., Djankov, S., Fan, J.P.H., Lang, L.H.P.: Disentangling the incentive and entrenchment effects of large shareholdings. J. Financ. 57(6), 2741–2771 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., Rhodes, E.: Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2, 429–444 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cooper, C.: Give and thou shall receive. Sales Market. Manag. 149(3), 75–76 (1997)Google Scholar
  20. Creyer, E.H., Ross Jr, W.T.: The influence of firm behavior on purchase intention: do consumers really care about business ethics? J. Consum. Market. 14, 419–432 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Durand, R., Vargas, V.: Ownership, organization, and private firms’ efficient use of resources. Strateg. Manag. J. 24(7), 667–675 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ellen, P.S., Mohr, L.A., Webb, D.J.: Charitable programs and the retailer: do they mix? J. Retail. 76(3), 393–406 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Emrouznejad: A mathematical model for dynamic efficiency using data envelopment analysis. Appl. Math. Comput. 160(2), 363–378 (2005)Google Scholar
  24. Farhad, A., Hojatolah, H., Sandra, H.: Use of virtual index for measuring efficiency of innovation systems: a cross-country study. Int. J. Technol. Manag. Sustain. Dev. 9, 195–212 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Farrell, M.: The measurement of productive efficiency. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. 120, 253–281 (1957)Google Scholar
  26. Freeman, R.E.: Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Pitman Publishing Inc, Massachusetts (1984)Google Scholar
  27. Friedman, M.: The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. N Y Times Mag 13, 32–33 (1970)Google Scholar
  28. Galbreath, J., Shum, P.: Do customer satisfaction and reputation mediate the CSR-FP link? Evidence from Australia. Austral. Manag. 37(2), 211–229 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Godfrey, P.C., Merrill, C.B., Hansen, J.M.: The relationship between corporate social responsibility and shareholder value: an empirical test of the risk management hypothesis. Strateg. Manag. J. 30(4), 425–445 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Greene, W.H.: Econometric Analysis, 5th edn. Prentice Hall, New Jersey (2003)Google Scholar
  31. Griffin, J.J., Mahon, J.F.: The corporate social performance and corporate financial performance debate: twenty-five years of incomparable research. Bus. Soc. 36, 5–31 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Haslem, J.A., Scheraga, C.A., Bedingfield, J.P.: DEA efficiency profiles of U.S. banks operating internationally. Int. Rev. Econ. Financ. 8, 165–182 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Henderson, D.: Misguided Virtue: False Notions of Corporate Social Responsibility. Institute of Economic Affairs, London (2002)Google Scholar
  34. Keim, D.G.: Corporate social responsibility: an assessment of the enlightened self-interest model. Acad. Manag. Rev. 3, 32–39 (1978)Google Scholar
  35. King, A., Lenox, M.: Exploring the locus of profitable pollution reduction. Manag. Sci. 48, 289–299 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., Vishny, R.: Investor protection and corporate valuation. J. Financ. 57(3), 1147–1170 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lin, C.H., Yang, H.L., Liou, D.Y.: The impact of corporate social responsibility on financial performance: evidence from business in Taiwan. Technol. Soc. 31(1), 56–63 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Luo, X., Bhattacharya, C.B.: Corporate social responsibility, customer satisfaction, and market value. J. Market. 70(1), 1–18 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mackey, A., Mackey, T.B., Barney, J.B.: Corporate social responsibility and firm performance: investor preferences and corporate strategies. Acad. Manag. Rev. 32(3), 817–835 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mattingly, J.E., Berman, S.: Measurement of corporate social action: discovering taxonomy in the Kinder Lydenburg Domini ratings data. Bus. Soc. 45, 20–46 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McDonald, J.: Using least squares and Tobit in second stage DEA efficiency analyses. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 197(2), 792–798 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. McWilliams, A., Siegel, D.: Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: correlation or misspecification? Strateg. Manag. J. 21, 603–609 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mullen, J.: Performance-based corporate philanthropy: how ‘giving smart’ can further corporate goals. Pub. Relat. Q 42(2), 42–48 (1997)Google Scholar
  44. Naveen, D., Edmund, K.H., Talai, O.: Benchmarking marketing productivity using data envelopment analysis. J. Bus. Res. 58(11), 1474–1482 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Nejati, M., Ghasemi, S.: Corporate social responsibility in Iran from the perspective of employees. Soc. Responsib. J. 8(4), 578–588 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F.L., Rynes, S.L.: Corporate social and financial performance: a meta-analysis. Org. Stud. 24, 403–441 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Paul, C.J.M., Siegel, D.: Corporate social responsibility and economic performance. J. Prod. Anal. 26(3), 207–211 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Preston, L.E., O’Bannon, D.P.: The corporate social-financial performance relationship: a typology and analysis. Bus. Soc. 36, 419–429 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Rettab, B., Brik, A., Mellahi, K.: A study of management perceptions of the impact of corporate social responsibility on organisational performance in emerging economies: the case of Dubai. J. Bus. Ethics 89(3), 371–390 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rong, P., Chen, S.: Economic analysis and management strategy of public welfare. Asia Pac. Econ. Manag. Rev. 12, 97–114 (2008)Google Scholar
  51. Russo, M.V., Fouts, P.A.: A resource-based perspective on corporate environmental performance and profitability. Acad. Manag. J. 40, 534–559 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Schreck, P.: Reviewing the business case for corporate social responsibility: new evidence and analysis. J. Bus. Ethics 103, 167–188 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Sen, A.: Economics, business principles and moral sentiments. Bus. Ethics Q. 7, 5–15 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sen, S., Bhattacharya, C.B.: Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. J. Mark. Res. 38(2), 225–243 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Shane, P.B., Spicer, B.H.: Market response to environmental information produced outside the firm. Account. Rev. 58(3), 521–538 (1983)Google Scholar
  56. Sklivas, S.: The strategic choice of managerial incentives. Rand J. Econ. 18, 452–458 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Smith, S.M., Alcorn, D.S.: Cause marketing: a new direction in the marketing of corporate responsibility. J. Consum. Mark. 8(3), 19–35 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Surroca, J., Tribo, J.A., Waddock, S.: Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: the role of intangible resources. Strateg. Manag. J. 31, 463–490 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Swanson, D.L.: Addressing a theoretical problem by reorienting the corporate social performance model. Acad. Manag. Rev. 20, 43–64 (1995)Google Scholar
  60. Thanassoulis, E.: Introduction to the Theory and applIcation of Data Envelopment Analysis. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Tsay, R.S.: Testing and modeling multivariate threshold models. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 93, 1188–1202 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Ullman, A.: Data in search of a theory: a critical examination of the relationship among social performance, social disclosure, and economic performance. Acad. Manag. Rev. 10, 540–577 (1985)Google Scholar
  63. Van Beurden, P., Gössling, T.: The worth of values—a literature review on the relation between corporate social and financial performance. J. Bus. Ethics 82(2), 407–424 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Vance, S.: Are socially responsible firms good investment risks? Manag. Rev. 64, 18–24 (1975)Google Scholar
  65. Vitaliano, D., Stella, G.: The cost of corporate social responsibility: the case of the community reinvestment act. J. Prod. Anal. 26(3), 235–244 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Waddock, S., Graves, S.: The corporate social performance-financial performance link. Strateg. Manag. J. 18, 303–319 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Walley, N., Whitehead, B.: It’s not easy being green. Harv. Bus. Rev. 72, 2–7 (1994)Google Scholar
  68. Wallich, H., McGowan, J.J.: Stockholder interest and the corporation’s role in social policy. In: New, A. (ed.) Rationale for Corporate Social Policy, pp. 39–59. Committee for Economic Development, New York (1970)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Business AdministrationDa-Yeh UniversityChanghuaTaiwan, ROC

Personalised recommendations