Can Ivory Towers be Green? The Impact of Organization Size on Organizational Social Performance
Organizations differ tremendously in the extent to which they engage in socially responsible behavior and the extent to which this behavior is evaluated by stakeholders. This research examines the complex role of organization size as a driver of perceptions of an organization’s socially responsible behavior and its social performance. Using a unique data set of 302 organizations in the higher education industry, we find that the strength of the organization size–organizational social performance (OSP) relationship is contingent on whether the organization is autonomous from community stakeholders and resource pressures. Our results show that the organization size–OSP relationship is stronger when stakeholders in the organization’s community are more involved in the organization itself and decision-making processes, and that this relationship is weaker when greater financial and human resources are available to the organization.
KeywordsHigher education industry Organizational autonomy Organization size Organizational social performance Stakeholder theory
- ACUP Climate Commitment (n.d.). Retrieved March 17, 2014 from http://acupcc.org/about/commitment.
- Bhattacharya, C. B., Sen, S., & Korschun, D. (2008). Using corporate social responsibility to win the war for talent. MIT Sloan Management Review, 49(2), 37–44.Google Scholar
- Brammer, S., & Millington, A. (2006). Firm size, organizational visibility and corporate philanthropy: An empirical analysis. Business Ethics: (A European Review), 15(1), 6–18.Google Scholar
- Chen, K. H., & Metcalf, R. W. (1980). The relationship between pollution control record and financial indicators revisited. Accounting Review, 55(1), 168–177.Google Scholar
- Clark, B. (2001). The entrepreneurial university: New foundations for collegiality, autonomy, and achievement. Higher Education Management, 13(2), 9–24.Google Scholar
- Frooman, J. (1999). Stakeholder influence strategies. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 191–205.Google Scholar
- Global Reporting Initiative (2014). Forward thinking future focus. Retrieved January 26, 2015 from https://www.globalreporting.org/resourcelibrary/GRI-CombinedReport-2013-2014-forward-thinking-future-focus.pdf.
- Kanani, R. (2014). How to measure social impact: New research and insights. Forbes, Retrieved March 15, 2014 from http://www.forbes.com/sites/rahimkanani/2014/03/15/how-to-measure-social-impact-new-research-and-insights/.
- Kennedy, P. (2003). A guide to econometrics (5th ed.). Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Lev, B., Petrovits, C., & Radhakrishnan, S. (2010). Is doing good good for you? How corporate charitable contributions enhance revenue growth. Strategic Management Journal, 31(2), 182–200.Google Scholar
- Lowry, R. C. (2001). Governmental structure, trustee selection and public university prices and spending: Multiple means to similar ends. American Journal of Political Science, 45(4), 845–861.Google Scholar
- Luria, S. E., & Luria, Z. (1970). The role of the university: Ivory tower, service station, or frontier post? Daedalus, 99(1), 75–83.Google Scholar
- Margolis, J.D., Elfenbein, H. A., and Walsh, J. P. (2009). Does it pay to be good… and does it matter? A meta-analysis of the relationship between corporate social and financial performance. Working paper.Google Scholar
- McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 117–127.Google Scholar
- Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886.Google Scholar
- Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
- 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(2), 195–204.Google Scholar
- Tilcsik, A., and Marquis, C. (2013). Punctuated generosity: How mega-events and natural disasters affect corporate philanthropy in U.S. communities. Administrative Science Quarterly, forthcoming.Google Scholar
- Turban, D. B., & Greening, D. W. (1997). Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees. Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 658–672.Google Scholar