Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The social dimension of firm performance: a data envelopment approach

  • Published:
Empirical Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A data envelopment model is proposed to quantify the social dimension of firm performance. Corporate social responsibility activities are treated as netputs to production. Production of good outputs and unintended by-products are combined in the overall measurement of firm performance. Our model is illustrated using a sample of global firms and suggests strikingly low social performance levels.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. By nonmarketed, we mean outputs that are not sold in a market for a well-established price.

  2. This may be an artifact of the limited data used in this analysis that may not be displaying a wide variation in mitigation activities.

References

  • Afriat SN (1972) Efficiency estimation of production functions. Int Econ Rev 13(3):568–598

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Altman BW, Vidaver-Cohen D (2000) A framework for understanding corporate citizenship. Introduction to the special edition of Business and Society Review “Corporate citizenship for the new millennium”. Bus Soc Rev 105(1):1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bacon CM, Getz C, Kraus S, Montenegro M, Holland K (2012) The social dimensions of sustainability and change in diversified farming systems. Ecol Soc 17(4):41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banker RD, Chang H (2006) The super-efficiency procedure for outlier identification, not for ranking efficient units. Eur J Oper Res 175(2):1311–1320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berman SL, Wicks AC, Kotha S, Jones TM (1999) Does stakeholder orientation matter? The relationship between stakeholder management models and firm financial performance. Acad Manag J 42(5):488–506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brammer S, Millington A (2008) Does it pay to be different? An analysis of the relationship between corporate social and financial performance. Strateg Manag J 29(12):1325–1343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll AB (1999) Corporate social responsibility evolution of a definitional construct. Bus Soc 38(3):268–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charnes A, Cooper WW, Rhodes E (1978) Measuring the efficiency of decision-making units. Eur J Oper Res 2(6):429–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cochran PL, Wood RA (1984) Corporate social responsibility and financial performance. Acad Manag J 27(1):42–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coelli T, Lauwers L, Van Huylenbroeck GV (2007) Environmental efficiency measurement and the materials balance condition. J Product Anal 28:3–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Bakker F, Nijhof A (2002) Responsible chain management: a capability assessment framework. Bus Strategy Environ 11(1):63–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Koeijer TJ, Wossink GAA, Struik PC, Renkema JA (2002) Measuring agricultural sustainability in terms of efficiency: the case of Dutch sugar beet growers. J Environ Manag 66(1):9–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyllick T, Hockerts K (2002) Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability. Bus Strategy Environ 11(2):130–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Färe R, Grosskopf S, Lovell CAK, Pasurka C (1989) Multilateral productivity comparisons when some outputs are undesirable: a non-parametric approach. Rev Econ Stat 71(1):90–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farrell MJ (1957) The measurement of productive efficiency. J R Stat Soc A 120(3):253–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun CJ (1996) Reputation: realizing value from the corporate image. Harvard Business School Press, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun CJ, Gardberg NA, Barnett ML (2000) Opportunity platforms and safety nets: corporate citizenship and reputational risk. Bus Soc Rev 105(1):85–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman R (1984) Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Pitman series in business and public policy. Harpercollins, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman M (1970) The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. NY Times Mag 13:32–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Garz H, Volk C (2007) What really counts: the materiality of extra-financial factors. WestLB Research Report, February 2007

  • Gladwin T, Krause TS, Kennelly J (1995) Beyond ecoefficiency: towards socially sustainable business. Sustain Dev 3(1):35–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greening DW, Turban DB (2000) Corporate social performance as a competitive advantage in attracting a quality workforce. Bus Soc 39(3):254–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habisch A, Meister HP, Schmidpeter R (eds) (2001) Corporate citizenship as investing in social capital. Logos Verlag, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen G, Wernerfelt B (1989) Determinants of firm performance. The relative importance of economic and organizational factors. Strateg Manag J 10(5):399–411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ioannou I, Serafeim G (2012a) The consequences of mandatory corporate sustainability reporting. Harvard Business School Working Paper, 11-100, Harvard University

  • Ioannou I, Serafeim G (2012b) What drives corporate social performance? The role of national-level institutions. J Int Bus Stud 43(9):834–864

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen MC (2002) Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Bus Ethics 12(2):235–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kansal M, Joshi M (2014) Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosures. Evidence from India. Adv Acc 30(1):217–229

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan RS, Norton DP (1992) The balanced scorecard–measures that drive performance. Harv Bus Rev 70:71–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Klang A, Vikman PÅ, Brattebø H (2003) Sustainable management of demolition waste-an integrated model for the evaluation of environmental, economic and social aspects. Resour Conserv Recycl 28(4):317–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koopmans TC (1951) an analysis of production as an efficient combination of activities. In: Koopmans TC (ed) Activity analysis of production and allocation, proceeding of a Conference. Wiley, London, pp 33–97

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin CH, Yang HL, Liou DY (2009) The impact of corporate social responsibility on financial performance: evidence from business in Taiwan. Technol Soc 31(1):56–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Littig B, Griebler E (2005) Social sustainability: a catchword between political pragmatism and social theory. Int J Sust Dev 8(1,2):65–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matten D, Crane A (2005) Corporate citizenship. Toward an extended theoretical conceptualization. Acad Manag Rev 30(1):166–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murty S, Russell RR, Levkoff S (2012) On modeling pollution-generating technologies. J Environ Econ Manag 64(1):117–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers JR, Layne LA, Marsh SM (2009) Injuries and fatalities to U.S. farmers and farm workers 55 years and older. Am J Ind Med 52(3):185–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Navarro P (1988) Why do corporations give to charity? J Bus 61(1):65–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Notarnicola B, Hayashi K, Curran MA, Huisingh D (2012) Progress in working towards a more sustainable agri-food industry. J Clean Prod 28:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penrose E (1959) The theory of the growth of the firm. Blackwell, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Piot-Lepetit I, Vermersch D (1998) Pricing organic nitrogen under the weak disposability assumption: an application to the French pig sector. J Agric Econ 49(1):85–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter M (1980) Competitive strategy. Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter M (1985) Competitive advantage: creating and sustaining superior performance. Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter M, van der Linde C (1995) Green and competitive: ending the stalemate. Harv Bus Rev 73(5):120–134

    Google Scholar 

  • Reed MG (2007) Seeking red herrings in the wood: testing the shared spaces of environmental and feminist geographies. Can Geogr 51:11–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reinhard S, Lovell CAK, Thijssen G (1999) Econometric estimation of technical and environmental efficiency: an application to Dutch dairy farms. Am J Agric Econ 81(1):44–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reinhard S, Lovell CAK, Thijssen G (2000) Environmental efficiency with multiple environmentally detrimental variables; estimated with SFA and DEA. Eur J Oper Res 121:287–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salzman O, Ionescu-Somers A, Steger U (2005) The business case for corporate sustainability: literature review and research options. Eur Manag J 23(1):27–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt I, Meurer M, Saling P, Kicherer A, Reuter W, Gensch CO (2004) Managing sustainability of products and processes with the socio-eco-efficiency analysis by BASF. Greener Manag Int 45:79–94

    Google Scholar 

  • Spangenberg JH, Bonniot O (1998) Sustainability indicators—a compass on the road towards sustainability. Wuppertal Paper No. 81, Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment, Energy

  • Wossink A, Denaux ZS (2007) Efficiency and innovation offsets in non-point source pollution control and the role of education. Int J Agric Resour Gov Ecol 6:79–95

    Google Scholar 

  • Waddock S (2001) The multiple bottom lines of corporate citizenship: social investing, reputation, and responsibility audits. Bus Soc Rev 105(3):323–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge financial support from Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Agrícolas (INIA) from Spain and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), Plan Nacional de Investigación Científica, Desarrollo e Innovación Tecnológica (I\(+\)D\(+\)i), Project Reference Number RTA2012-00002-00-00.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Agricultural and Resource Economics Department, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Maryland University, 3212 Symons Hall, College Park, MD, 20742, USA

    Robert G. Chambers

  2. School of Economics, University of Queensland, St. Lucia, QLD, 4072, USA

    Robert G. Chambers

  3. Agricultural and Consumer Economics Department, College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois, 335 Mumford Hall, Urbana, IL, 61801, USA

    Teresa Serra

Authors
  1. Robert G. Chambers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Teresa Serra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Teresa Serra.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chambers, R.G., Serra, T. The social dimension of firm performance: a data envelopment approach. Empir Econ 54, 189–206 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-016-1135-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-016-1135-z

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation