Advertisement

The Social Impact of Corporate Citizenship Programs on Their Beneficiaries and Society at Large: A Case Study

  • Marjelle VermeulenEmail author
  • Karen Maas
Chapter
Part of the Nonprofit and Civil Society Studies book series (NCSS)

Abstract

Within their corporate citizenship program (CCP) “Future Matters,” Nationale-Nederlanden (NN) runs several community investment programs. One of these programs is the Social Innovation Relay (SIR). SIR is a partnership with Junior Achievement Europe and exists of a highly developed international network of corporate volunteer employees and students. SIR aims to increase entrepreneurial competences, practical business experiences, and financial resilience of young people by entrepreneurship education. Available research about employee volunteering (EV) mainly focused on indicating and showing its positive effects in CCPs on the employee and the organization. Unfortunately, knowledge about the effect of EV on the target group and society at large is less developed. In this study, we aim to bridge this research gap by assessing the impact of the program on the SIR participants. We found that the beneficiaries of the SIR program indeed show more entrepreneurial intention, behavior, and social awareness. Our findings show that the main results are achieved during the first phase of the program. Because the skills and characteristics of entrepreneurial behavior of the beneficiaries increase during the program, we can argue that it is likely that NN creates social impact for the beneficiaries with their program.

Keywords

Social impact Corporate citizenship Quantitative research Experiment 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Nationale-Nederlanden for their financial support for this research and JA Europe for their coordination in this research.

References

  1. Arenius, P., & Minniti, M. (2005). Perceptual variables and nascent entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 24(3), 233–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Battilana, J., Lee, M., Walker, J., & Dorsey, C. (2012). In search of the hybrid ideal. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 10(3), 50–55.Google Scholar
  3. Bilán, S. G., Kisenwether, E. C., Rzasa, S. E., & Wise, J. C. (2005). Developing and assessing students’ entrepreneurial skills and mind-set. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(2), 233–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Botha, M., Nieman, G., & van Vuuren, J. (2006). Enhancing female entrepreneurship by enabling access to skills. The International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 2(4), 479-493.Google Scholar
  5. Chen, J. C., Patten, D. M., & Roberts, R. W. (2008). Corporate charitable contributions: A corporate social performance or legitimacy strategy? Journal of Business Ethics, 82(1), 131–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Clark, C., Rosenzweig, W., Long, D., & Olsen, S. (2004). Double bottom line project report: Assessing social impact in double bottom line ventures. Methods catalog. New York: Columbia Business School. Retrieved at http://www.shidler.hawaii.edu/Portals/1/resources/DoubleBottomLine.pdf.Google Scholar
  7. de Gilder, D., Schuyt, T. N., & Breedijk, M. (2005). Effects of an employee volunteering program on the work force: The ABN-AMRO Case. Journal of Business Ethics, 61(2), 143–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2010). Maximizing business returns to corporate social responsibility (CSR): The role of CSR communication. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 8–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Duval-Couetil, N. (2013). Assessing the impact of entrepreneurship education programs: Challenges and approaches. Journal of Small Business Management, 51(3), 394–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Eccles, R. G., & Krzus, M. P. (2010). One report: Integrated reporting for a sustainable strategy. Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  11. Elias, M. J., Gara, M. A., Schuyler, T. F., Branden-Muller, L. R., & Sayette, M. A. (1991). The promotion of social competence: Longitudinal study of a preventive school-based program. The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 61(3), 409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Entrialgo, M., Fernández, E., & Vázquez, C. J. (2000). Characteristics of managers as determinants of entrepreneurial orientation: Some Spanish evidence. Enterprise and Innovation Management Studies, 1(2), 187–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fayolle, A., Gailly, B., & Lassas-Clerc, N. (2006). Assessing the impact of entrepreneurship education programmes: A new methodology. Journal of European Industrial Training, 30(9), 701–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Geroy, G. D., Wright, P. C., & Jacoby, L. (2000). Toward a conceptual framework of employee volunteerism: An aid for the human resource manager. Management Decision, 38(4), 280–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gürol, Y., & Atsan, N. (2006). Entrepreneurial characteristics amongst university students: Some insights for entrepreneurship education and training in Turkey. Education and Training, 48(1), 25–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Haski-Leventhal, D., Meijs, L. C., & Hustinx, L. (2010). The third-party model: Enhancing volunteering through governments, corporations and educational institutes. Journal of Social Policy, 39(1), 139–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Henry, C., Hill, F., & Leitch, C. (2005). Entrepreneurship education and training: Can entrepreneurship be taught? Part I. Education and Training, 47(2), 98–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Idowu, S. O., & Papasolomou, I. (2007). Are the corporate social responsibility matters based on good intentions or false pretences? An empirical study of the motivations behind the issuing of CSR reports by UK companies. Corporate Governance: The international Journal of Business in Society, 7(2), 136–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Koellinger, P., Minniti, M., & Schade, C. (2007). “I think I can, I think I can”: Overconfidence and entrepreneurial behavior. Journal of Economic Psychology, 28(4), 502–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kume, A., Kume, V., & Shahini, B. (2013). Entrepreneurial characteristics amongst university students in Albania. European Scientific Journal, 9, 16.Google Scholar
  21. Lee, M. D. P., & Lounsbury, M. (2011). Domesticating radical rant and rage: An exploration of the consequences of environmental shareholder resolutions on corporate environmental performance. Business & Society, 50(1), 155–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Liket, K. C., Rey-Garcia, M., & Maas, K. E. (2014). Why Aren’t Evaluations Working and What to Do About It A Framework for Negotiating Meaningful Evaluation in Nonprofits. American Journal of Evaluation, 35(2), 171–188.Google Scholar
  23. Liñán, F. (2008). Skill and value perceptions: how do they affect entrepreneurial intentions?. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal 4(3), 257–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Liñán, F., & Chen, Y. W. (2009). Development and cross-cultural application of a specific instrument to measure entrepreneurial intentions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 593–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 135–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lüthje, C., & Franke, N. (2003). The ‘making’ of an entrepreneur: Testing a model of entrepreneurial intent among engineering students at MIT. R&D Management, 33(2), 135–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Maas, K. (2009). Corporate social performance: From output measurement to impact measurement. (No. EPS-2009-182-STR, ERIM Ph.D. Series). Rotterdam: Erasmus University Rotterdam.Google Scholar
  28. Maas, K., & Liket, K. (2011). Talk the walk: Measuring the impact of strategic philanthropy. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(3), 445–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Maas, K. E. H., & Liket, K. C. (2016). Strategic philanthropy: A happy marriage of business and society? Business & Society, 55(6), 889–921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 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(2), 149–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Monfort, A., & Villagra, N. (2016). Corporate social responsability and corporate foundations in building responsible brands. El profesional de la Información (EPI), 25(5), 767–777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Murillo, D., & Lozano, J. M. (2006). SMEs and CSR: An approach to CSR in their own words. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(3), 227–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Muthuri, J. N., Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2009). Employee volunteering and social capital: Contributions to corporate social responsibility. British Journal of Management, 20, 75–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Oosterbeek, H., Van Praag, M., & IJsselstein, A. (2010). The impact of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurship skills and motivation. European Economic Review, 54(3), 442–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Roza, L. (2016). Employee Engagement in Corporate Social Responsibility. A collection of essays. (No. EPS-2016-396-ORG). Rotterdam: Erasmus University.Google Scholar
  36. Samuel, O., Roza, L., & Meijs, L. (2016). Exploring partnerships from the perspective of HSO beneficiaries: The case of corporate volunteering. Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance, 40(3), 220-237.Google Scholar
  37. Santana, A. (2015). Disentangling the knot: Variable mixing of four motivations for firms’ use of social practices. Business & Society, 54(6), 763–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Souitaris, V., Zerbinati, S., & Al-Laham, A. (2007). Do entrepreneurship programmes raise entrepreneurial intention of science and engineering students? The effect of learning, inspiration and resources. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(4), 566–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Toxopeus, H. S., Maas, K. E., & Liket, K. C. (2016). Innovating for impact investing. Principles and practice of impact investing: A catalytic revolution (pp. 174–187). Sheffield: Greenleaf.Google Scholar
  40. Turker, D., & Sonmez Selçuk, S. (2009). Which factors affect entrepreneurial intention of university students? Journal of European Industrial Training, 33(2), 142–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. van Duuren, E., Plantinga, A., & Scholtens, B. (2016). ESG integration and the investment management process: Fundamental investing reinvented. Journal of Business Ethics, 138(3), 525–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. van Knippenberg, D., & Sleebos, E. (2006). Organizational identification versus organizational commitment: Self-definition, social exchange, and job attitudes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(5), 571–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. van Knippenberg, B., Martin, L., & Tyler, T. (2006). Process-orientation versus outcome-orientation during organizational change: The role of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(6), 685–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Villagra, N., & López, B. (2013). Analysis of values and communication of the responsible brands. Corporate Brand strategies for sustainability/Análisis de los valores y la comunicación de las Marcas responsables. Estrategias de las marcas corporativas en el contexto de la Sostenibilidad. Communications Society, 26(1), 196–221.Google Scholar
  45. Wilson, F., Kickul, J., & Marlino, D. (2007). Gender, entrepreneurial self-efficacy, and entrepreneurial career intentions: Implications for entrepreneurship education. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31(3), 387–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Impact Centre Erasmus (ICE), Erasmus University RotterdamRotterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations