Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Corporate Social Responsibility: An Outline of Key Concepts, Trends, and Theories

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Practising CSR in the Middle East

Abstract

This chapter puts corporate social responsibility (CSR) in the Middle East in the wider global context and is designed to help the reader to navigate this increasingly complex area. It discusses the meaning of CSR and related terms, the key global trends with regard to CSR practices, the role of context including differences between CSR in different countries, the use of CSR for corporate strategies, and the academic scholarship on CSR. What emerges is that CSR is very context specific: the understanding and the practice of CSR differ enormously between different countries, between different industries, or between small and large companies.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, C. A., Hill, W. Y., & Roberts, C. B. (1998). Corporate social reporting practices in Western Europe: Legitimating corporate behaviour? British Accounting Review, 30, 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aguilera, R. V., Rupp, D. E., Williams, C. A., & Ganapathi, J. (2007). Putting the S Back in corporate social responsibility: A multilevel theory of social change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 836–863.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aguilera-Caracuel, J., Aragón-Correa, J., Hurtado-Torres, N., & Rugman, A. (2012). The effects of institutional distance and headquarters’ financial performance on the generation of environmental standards in multinational companies. Journal of Business Ethics, 105(4), 461–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. (2012). What we know and don’t know about corporate social responsibility: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 38(4), 932–968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J., & Billou, N. (2007). Serving the world’s poor: Innovation at the base of the economic pyramid. Journal of Business Strategy, 28(2), 14–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnea, A., & Rubin, A. (2010). Corporate social responsibility as a conflict between shareholders. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(1), 71–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blowfield, M., & Frynas, J. G. (2005). Setting new agendas – Critical perspectives on corporate social responsibility in the developing world. International Affairs, 81, 499–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bocquet, R., Le Bas, C., Mothea, C., & Poussing, N. (2013). Are firms with different CSR profiles equally innovative? Empirical analysis with survey data. European Management Journal, 31(6), 642–654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brammer, S., & Millington, A. (2003). The effect of stakeholder preferences, organizational structure and industry type on corporate community involvement. Journal of Business Ethics, 45(3), 213–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brammer, S., & Millington, A. (2004). The development of corporate charitable contributions in the UK: A stakeholder analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 41(8), 1411–1434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brekke, K. A., & Nyborg, K. (2008). Attracting responsible employees: Green production as labor market screening. Resource and Energy Economics, 30(4), 509–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. (2003). Intra and inter-sectorial effects in environmental disclosures: Evidence for legitimacy theory? Business Strategy and the Environment, 12, 357–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. L. (2007). Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 946–967.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 4, 497–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business & Society, 38(3), 268–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B., & Shabana, K. M. (2010). The business case for corporate social responsibility: A review of concepts, research and practice. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 85–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y. S., Lai, S. B., & Wen, C. T. (2006). The influence of green innovation performance on corporate advantage in Taiwan. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(4), 331–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christmann, P. (2004). Multinational companies and the natural environment: Determinants of global environmental policy standardization. Academy of Management Journal, 47(5), 747–760.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciulla, J. B. (1991). Why is business talking about ethics? Reflections on foreign conversations. California Management Review, 34(1), 67–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colombo, S., Guerci, M., & Miandar, T. (2017). What do unions and employers negotiate under the umbrella of corporate social responsibility: Comparative evidence from the Italian metal and chemical industries. Journal of Business Ethics, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3503-9.

  • Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2010). Business ethics (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darnall, N., Henriques, I., & Sadorsky, P. (2010). Adopting proactive environmental strategy: The influence of stakeholders and firm size. Journal of Management Studies, 47(6), 1072–1094.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doh, J. P., & Guay, T. R. (2006). Corporate social responsibility, public policy, and NGO activism in Europe and the United States: An institutional-stakeholder perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 47–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elijido-Ten, E., Kloot, L., & Clarkson, P. (2010). Extending the application of stakeholder influence strategies to environmental disclosures. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 23(8), 1032–1059.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elkington, J. (1994). Towards the sustainable corporation: Win-win-win business strategies for sustainable development. California Management Review, 36, 90–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2011). Communication from the commission to the European parliament, the council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the regions: A renewed EU strategy 2011–14 for corporate social responsibility.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faleye, O., & Trahan, E. (2011). Labor-friendly corporate practices: Is what is good for employees good for shareholders? Journal of Business Ethics, 101(1), 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fassin, Y., Werner, A., van Rossem, S., Signori, E., Garriga, H., von Weltzien, H., & Schlierer, H.-J. (2015). CSR and related terms in SME owner–managers’ mental models in six European countries: National context matters. Journal of Business Ethics, 128, 433–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frooman, J. (1999). Stakeholder influence strategies. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 191–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frynas, J. G. (2015). Strategic CSR, value creation and competitive advantage. In T. C. Lawton & T. S. Rajwani (Eds.), The Routledge companion to non-market strategy (pp. 245–262). Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frynas, J. G., & Stephens, S. (2015). Political corporate social responsibility: Reviewing theories and setting new agendas. International Journal of Management Reviews, 17(4), 483–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frynas, J. G., & Yamahaki, C. (2016). Corporate social responsibility: Review and roadmap of theoretical perspectives. Business Ethics: A European Review, 25(3), 258–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galaskiewicz, J. (1985). Social Organization of an Urban Grants Economy: A study of business philanthropy and nonprofit organizations. Orlando: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glavas, A. (2016). Corporate social responsibility and organizational psychology: An integrative review. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 144.

    Google Scholar 

  • GlobeScan, SustainAbility and Sustainable Brands. (2016). The 2016 sustainability leaders: A GlobeScan & SustainAbility survey. https://globescan.com/the-2016-gss-sustainability-leaders-report/

  • GRI. (2013). Sustainability topics for sectors: What do stakeholders want to know? https://www.globalreporting.org/resourcelibrary/sustainability-topics.pdf

  • GRI. (2017). About GRI. Global reporting initiative. https://www.globalreporting.org/Information/about-gri/Pages/default.aspx

  • Hah, K., & Freeman, S. (2014). Multinational enterprise subsidiaries and their CSR: A conceptual framework of the management of CSR in smaller emerging economies. Journal of Business Ethics, 122(1), 125–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S. L. (1995). A natural-resource-based view of the firm. The Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 986–1014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hess, D., & Warren, D. E. (2008). The meaning and meaningfulness of corporate social initiatives. Business and Society Review, 113(2), 163–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Husted, B. W., & Allen, D. B. (2006). Corporate social responsibility in the multinational enterprise: Strategic and institutional approaches. Journal of International Business Studies, 37, 838–849.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingram, P., & Simons, T. (1995). Institutional and resource dependence determinants of responsiveness to work-family issues. Academy of Management Journal, 38(5), 1466–1482.

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO. (2017a). ISO 14000 family – Environmental management. https://www.iso.org/iso-14001-environmental-management.html

  • ISO. (2017b). ISO 26000 – Social responsibility. https://www.iso.org/iso-26000-social-responsibility.html

  • ISO. (2018). ISO survey 2017. https://www.iso.org/the-iso-survey.html

  • Jackson, G., & Apostolakou, A. (2010). Corporate social responsibility in Western Europe: An institutional mirror or substitute? Journal of Business Ethics, 94(3), 371–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jamali, D. (2010). The CSR of MNC subsidiaries in developing countries: Global, local, substantive or diluted? Journal of Business Ethics, 93(Suppl. 2), 181–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jamali, D., & Karam, C. (2018). Corporate social responsibility in developing countries as an emerging field of study. International Journal of Management Reviews, 20(1), 32–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jamali, D., Karam, C., Yin, J., & Soundararajan, V. (2017). CSR logics in developing countries: Translation, adaptation and stalled development. Journal of World Business, 52(3), 343–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kang, N., & Moon, J. (2012). Institutional complementarity between corporate governance and corporate social responsibility: A comparative institutional analysis of three capitalisms. Socio-Economic Review, 10(1), 85–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanter, R. M. (1999). From spare change to real change: The social sector as beta site for business innovation. Harvard Business Review, 77(3), 122–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knudsen, J. S., Moon, J., & Slager, R. (2005). Government policies for corporate social responsibility in Europe: A comparative analysis of institutionalisation. Academy of Management Review, 30, 166–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolk, A., Rivera-Santos, M., & Rufín, C. (2014). Reviewing a decade of research on the “base/bottom of the pyramid” (BOP) concept. Business & Society, 53(3), 338–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • KPMG. (2015). Currents of change: The KPMG survey of corporate responsibility reporting 2015. https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmg/pdf/2016/02/kpmg-international-survey-of-corporate-responsibility-reporting-2015.pdf

  • Leonidou, C. N., Katsikeas, C. S., & Morgan, N. A. (2013). “Greening” the marketing mix: Do firms do it and does it pay off? Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 41(2), 151–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lepoutre, J., & Heene, A. (2006). Investigating the impact of firm size on small business social responsibility: A critical review. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(3), 257–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Louche, C., Idowu, S. O., & Filho, W. L. (2010). Innovation in corporate social responsibility: How innovative is it? An exploratory study of 129 global innovative CSR solutions. In C. Louche, S. O. Idowu, & W. L. Filho (Eds.), Innovative CSR – From risk management to value creation (pp. 284–304). Sheffield: Greenleaf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lourenço, I. C., Callen, J. L., Branco, M. C., & Curto, J. D. (2014). The value relevance of reputation for sustainability leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 119(1), 17–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marano, V., & Kostova, T. (2016). Unpacking the institutional complexity in adoption of CSR practices in multinational enterprises. Journal of Management Studies, 53(1), 28–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matten, D., & Crane, A. (2005). Corporate citizenship: Toward an extended theoretical conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 166–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). “Implicit” and “explicit” CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 404–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKinsey. (2014). Sustainability’s strategic worth: McKinsey global survey results. https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/sustainability-and-resource-productivity/our-insights/sustainabilitys-strategic-worth-mckinsey-global-survey-results

  • McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 117–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2011). Creating and capturing value: Strategic corporate social responsibility, resource-based theory, and sustainable competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 37(5), 1480–1495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mellahi, K., Frynas, J. G., Sun, P., & Siegel, D. (2016). A review of the nonmarket strategy literature: Towards a multi-theoretical integration. Journal of Management, 42(1), 143–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moir, L., & Taffler, R. J. (2004). Does corporate philanthropy exist? Business giving to the arts in the U.K. Journal of Business Ethics, 54(2), 149–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montiel, I., & Husted, B. (2009). The adoption of voluntary environmental management programs in Mexico: First movers as institutional entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Ethics, 88, 349–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muthuri, J. N., & Gilbert, V. (2011). An institutional analysis of corporate social responsibility in Kenya. Journal of Business Ethics, 98(3), 467–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neu, D., Warsame, H., & Pedwell, K. (1998). Managing public impressions: Environmental disclosures in annual reports. Accounting, Organizations & Society, 23(3), 265–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen. (2015). The sustainability imperative: New insights on consumer expectations. https://www.nielsen.com/uk/en/insights/reports/2015/the-sustainability-imperative.html

  • O’Donovan, G. (2002). Environmental disclosures in the annual report: Extending the applicability and predictive power of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 15(3), 344–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2017). OECD guidelines for multinational enterprises. http://www.oecd.org/corporate/mne/.

  • Örtenblad, A. (2016). Research handbook on corporate social responsibility in context. Cheltenham/Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Owen, D. L., Swift, T. A., Humphrey, C., & Bowerman, M. (2000). The new social audits: Accountability, managerial capture or the agenda of social champions? European Accounting Review, 9, 81–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patten, D. M. (1992). Intra-industry environmental disclosures in response to the Alaskan oil spill: A note on legitimacy theory. Accounting, Organizations & Society, 17(5), 471–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pegg, S. (2003). An emerging market for the new millennium: Transnational corporations and human rights. In J. G. Frynas & S. Pegg (Eds.), Transnational corporations and human rights (pp. 1–32). London: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (2003). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy & society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & van der Linde, C. (1995). Green and competitive: Ending the stalemate. Harvard Business Review, 33, 120–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • PwC. (2016). Redefining business success in a changing world: CEO survey. https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/ceo-survey/assets/2016-global-investor-survey.pdf

  • Roberts, R. W. (1992). Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: An application of stakeholder theory. Accounting, Organizations & Society, 17(6), 595–612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, J. L., & Barling, J. (2013). Greening organizations through leaders’ influence on employees’ pro-environmental behaviors. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 176–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russo, M., & Fouts, P. (1997). A resource-based perspective on corporate environmental performance and profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 534–559.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlierer, H.-J., Werner, A., Signori, S., Garriga, E., von Weltzien Høivik, H., van Rossem, A., & Fassin, Y. (2012). How do European SME owner managers make sense of ‘stakeholder management’? Insights from a cross-national study. Journal of Business Ethics, 109, 39–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R. (2001). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sekhar, R. C. (2002). Ethical choices in business. Delhi: Response Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, S., & Vredenburg, H. (1998). Proactive corporate environmental strategy and the development of competitively valuable organizational capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 19(8), 729–753.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shu, C., Zhou, K. Z., Xiao, Y., & Gao, S. (2016). How green management influences product innovation in China: The role of institutional benefits. Journal of Business Ethics, 133(3), 471–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soundararajan, V., Jamali, D., & Spence, L. J. (2018). Small business social responsibility: A critical multilevel review, synthesis and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 20(4), 934–956.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. J. (2016). Small business social responsibility: Redrawing core CSR theory. Business & Society, 55, 23–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. J., Frynas, J. G., Muthuri, J., & Navare, J. (2018). Introduction to small business social responsibility: Global perspectives. In L. J. Spence, J. G. Frynas, J. Muthuri, & J. Navare (Eds.), Research handbook on small business social responsibility: Global perspectives. Cheltenham/Northampton: Edward Elgar.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • SustainAbility. (2001). Buried treasure: Uncovering the business case for corporate sustainability. London: SustainAbility.

    Google Scholar 

  • SustainAbility. (2002). Developing value: The business case for sustainability in emerging markets. London: SustainAbility.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Global Compact. (2018). Our participants. Retrieved from https://www.unglobalcompact.org/what-is-gc/participants

  • Unerman, J., & Chapman, C. (2014). Academic contributions to enhancing accounting for sustainable development. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 39(6), 385–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, M. (2010). Corporate social performance and innovation with high social benefits: A quantitative analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(4), 581–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, D. J. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16, 691–718.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeng, S., Xu, X., Yin, H., & Tam, C. (2012). Factors that drive Chinese listed companies in voluntary disclosure of environmental information. Journal of Business Ethics, 109(3), 309–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Open University Business School, Milton Keynes, UK

    Jędrzej George Frynas

  2. Center for Sustainability Studies at Fundação Getulio Vargas, São Paulo, Brazil

    Camila Yamahaki

Authors
  1. Jędrzej George Frynas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Camila Yamahaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Economic Research and Sustainable Business Development, Dubai Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Dubai, United Arab Emirates

    Belaid Rettab

  2. Centre for Responsible Business, Dubai Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Dubai, United Arab Emirates

    Kamel Mellahi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Frynas, J.G., Yamahaki, C. (2019). Corporate Social Responsibility: An Outline of Key Concepts, Trends, and Theories. In: Rettab, B., Mellahi, K. (eds) Practising CSR in the Middle East. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02044-6_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation