Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Contexts for Inter-organizational Engagement: Societal Concerns, Government Behavior, and Other Findings

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Corporate Citizenship and Higher Education

  • 340 Accesses

Abstract

Responses to the 1990s and early 2000s scandals are discussed to consider what society views as proper behavior with businesses. This chapter explores key issues and recent legislation providing more transparency and accountability. The past 50 years have created more transparency and greater expectations from businesses and their behaviors. This chapter explores societal expectations of organizational behavior through various principles and practices of morality, leadership modeling and governance, and organizational ethics. A major consideration in the 21st Century is accountability, which includes transparency. If not self-regulated, then governmental compliance aids in supporting ethical and conscientious practices. A number of business and industry organizations that foster dialogue and best practices for engagement with higher education are highlighted. Concerns and examples are noted as well as lessons learned. Finally, other findings from the research are discussed including culture, economic challenges, alumni connectivity, and geography.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
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

References

  • Abbot, E., Borchert, A., Dwyer, M., Fuller, C., Gibbs, G., Hanifan, M. et al. (2011, August 2). Five elements of a successful twenty-first century university corporate relations program. White Paper, Network of Academic Corporate Relations Officers Benchmarking Committee. Retrieved from http://web.mac.com/nacro/NACRO/Welcome_files/White_Paper_FINAL.pdf

  • Acar, W., Aupperle, K. E., & Lowry, R. M. (2001). An empirical exploration of measures of social responsibility across the spectrum of organization types. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 9(1), 26–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aiken, M., & Hage, J. (1968). Organizational interdependence and intra-organizational structure. American Sociological Review, 33(6), 912–930.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albert, S., & Whetten, D. A. (1985). Organizational identity. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Straw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior: An annual series of analytical essays and critical reviews (Vol. 7, pp. 263–295). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aldrich, H. E. (1979). Organizations and environments. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, D. (2009, August 13–14). The relentless pursuit of collaborative corporate relations. Presentation at the NACRO Annual Meeting, Seattle, WA. Retrieved from http://web.mac.com/nacro/NACRO/Toolbox.html

  • Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 20–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bar-Tal, D. (1976). Pro-social behavior: Theory and research. Washington, DC: Hemisphere Publishing Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benioff, M., & Adler, C. (2007). The business of changing the world: Twenty great leaders on strategic corporate philanthropy. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berezin, V. (2010). Social reporting: Getting a clear picture. The Corporate Citizen, 4, 11–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. D. (2008). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boston College center for Corporate Citizenship (BCCCC). (2018). About the Boston College Center for Corporate Citizenship. Retrieved from https://ccc.bc.edu/content/ccc/about.html

  • Boyd, D. P., & Halfond, J. A. (1990). Corporate ties and integrity at U.S. business schools. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 36(38), A44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brief, A. P., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1986). Pro-social organizational behaviors. Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 710–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Business-Higher Education Forum (BHEF). (2018). About BHEF. Retrieved from http://www.bhef.com/about/index.asp

  • Caboni, T. C. (2010). The normative structure of college and university fundraising behaviors. The Journal of Higher Education, 81(3), 339–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B., & Buchholtz, A. K. (2017). Business & society: Ethics, sustainability, and stakeholder management (10th ed.). Mason, OH: Thomson South-Western.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciconte, B. L., & Jacob, J. G. (2009). Fundraising basics: A complete guide (3rd ed.). Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cleland, T. A., Colledge, B., Ellerbrock, M., Lynch, K., McGowan, D., Patera, S. et al. (2012, August 2). Metrics for a successful twenty-first century academic corporate relations program. White Paper, Network of Academic Corporate Relations Officers Benchmarking Committee. Retrieved from http://www.nacroonline.org

  • Clevenger, M. R. (2014). An organizational analysis of the inter-organizational relationships between a public American higher education university and six United States corporate supporters: An instrumental, ethnographic case study using Cone’s corporate citizenship spectrum. ProQuest published doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, MO. Retrieved from https://mospace.umsystem.edu/xmlui/handle/10355/45866

  • Cloniger, D. S. (1985). Corporate social responsibility and the business manager: An ethical inquiry. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation.) Emory University, Atlanta, GA.

    Google Scholar 

  • De George, R. T. (2009). Business ethics (7th ed.). Upper River Saddle, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeMasi, E. (2010). The 2010 Corporate Social Responsibility Index: Who made the top 10? Retrieved from http://inspiredeconomist.com/2010/10/12/the-2010-corporate-social-responsibility-index-who-made-the-top-10/

  • Dunn, R. H., & Babbitts, J. (1991). Being ethical and accountable in the grantmaking process. In J. P. Shannon (Ed.), The corporate contributions handbook: Devoting private means to public needs (pp. 332–342). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eddy, P. L. (2010). Partnerships and collaborations in higher education. ASHE Higher Education Report, 36(2). San Francisco, CA: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliott, D. (2006). The kindness of strangers: Philanthropy and higher education. New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, G. A. (2000). Ethical issues in fund raising. In P. Buchanan (Ed.), Handbook of institutional advancement (3rd ed., pp. 363–366). Washington, DC: CASE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finn, W. T. (1990). Training business ethics: How employees behave on company time has become the business of business. Successful Meetings, 39(10), 167–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, M. (2000). Ethical decision making in fund raising. New York, NY: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, M. A. (2006). Universities, businesses and public authorities—And the inclusive development of society. In L. E. Weber & J. J. Duderstadt (Eds.), Universities and business: Partnering for the knowledge society (pp. 187–199). London: Economica Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fulton, K., & Blau, A. (2005). Looking out for the future: An orientation for twenty-first century philanthropists. Cambridge, MA: The Monitor Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garvin Jr., C. C. (1975). Corporate philanthropy: The third aspect of social responsibility. New York, NY: Council for Financial Aid to Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giroux, H. A., & Giroux, S. S. (2004). Take back higher education: Race, youth, and the crisis of democracy in the post-civil rights era. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Grabois, A. N. (Ed.). (2010). National directory of corporate giving (16th ed.). New York, NY: Foundation Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, D., McKone-Sweet, K., & Wilson, H. J. (2011). The new entrepreneurial leader: Developing leaders who shape social and economic opportunity. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greening, D. W., & Gray, B. (1994). Testing a model of organizational response to social and political issues. The Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 467–498.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guetzkow, H. (1966). Relations among organizations. In R. V. Bowers (Ed.), Studies on behavior in organizations: A research symposium (pp. 13–44). Athens, GA: University of Georgia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, D. (2012, February 26). For the 21st century, a network of beneficial philanthropy and corporate citizenship. Forbes. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/dougguthrie/2012/02/26/for-the-21st-century-a-network-of-beneficial-philanthropy-and-corporate-citizenship/

  • Herman, R. D. (2008). Regulation in the nonprofit sector: Symbolic politics and the social construction of accountability. In J. G. Pettey (Ed.), Ethical fundraising: A guide for nonprofit boards and fundraisers (pp. 235–245). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hosmer, L. T. (2008). The ethics of management: A multidisciplinary approach (7th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, J. A. (2004). Corporate governance reform: What it means to associations. Association Management, 56(1), 17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, N. H. (1973). Corporate power and social responsibility. New York, NY: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, J. (2007, August 16). Making the connection: Metrics of success. Presentation at the NACRO Annual Meeting, Minneapolis, MN. Retrieved from http://web.mac.com/nacro/NACRO/Toolbox.html

  • Johnson, J. (2008, April 14–15). Survey tools and implications: Measuring impact. Presentation at the NACRO Annual Meeting, Atlanta, GA. Retrieved from http://web.mac.com/nacro/NACRO/Toolbox.html

  • Joseph, J. A. (1991). The corporate stake in community involvement: Has business lost its social conscience? In J. P. Shannon (Ed.), The corporate contributions handbook: Devoting private means to public needs (pp. 3–19). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). Translating strategy into action: The balanced scorecard. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaptein, M. (2007, Autumn). Ethical guidelines for compiling corporate social reports. The Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 27, 71–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karoff, H. P. (2004). Just money: A critique of contemporary American philanthropy. Boston, MA: TPI Editions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (2005). Organizations and the system concept. In J. Shafritz, J. Ott, & Y. Jang (Eds.), Classics of organization theory (6th ed., pp. 480–490). Boston, MA: Thomson Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kidder, R. M. (2001). Ethics is not optional. Association Management, 53(13), 30–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kidder, R. M. (2006). Moral courage. New York, NY: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liggett, G. (2000). Ethics in corporate and foundation fundraising. In M. K. Murphy’s (Ed.), Corporate and foundation support: Strategies for funding education in the 21st century (pp. 3–13). New York, NY: Case.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lim, T. L. (2010). Measuring the value of corporate philanthropy: Social impact, business benefits, and investor returns. New York, NY: Committee Encouraging Corporate Philanthropy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lister, D. (2008). The appearance of impropriety. In J. G. Pettey (Ed.), Ethical fundraising: A guide for nonprofit boards and fundraisers (pp. 3–18). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacAllister, J. A. (1991). Why give? Notes to a new CEO. In J. P. Shannon (Ed.), The corporate contributions handbook: Devoting private means to public needs (pp. 121–125). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madden, C. (1977). Forces which influence ethical behavior. In C. C. Walton (Ed.), The ethics of corporate conduct (pp. 31–78). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malloy, D. C., & Agarwal, J. (2003). Factors influencing ethical climate in nonprofit organization: An empirical investigation. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 8(3), 224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, R. C., & Le Boeuf, B. J. (2009). Developing university-industry relations: Pathways to innovation from the West Coast. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Molnar, A. (2002). The corporate branding of our schools. Educational Leadership, 60(2), 74–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, G. (2006). Images of organization. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, B. T. (2017). A textual analysis of whistleblower protections under the Dodd-Frank Act. Notre Dame Law Review, 92(5), 2259–2279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Network of Academic Corporate Relations Officers (NACRO). (2018). Why NACRO. Retrieved from https://nacrocon.org/about/why-nacro

  • Nikolaeva, R., & Bicho, M. (2011). The role of institutional and reputational factors in the voluntary adoption of corporate social responsibility reporting standards. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39, 136–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nonprofit Research Collaborative. (2010). The nonprofit research collaborative November 2010 fundraising survey. Retrieved from http://www.urban.org/uploadedpdf/1001467-Nonprofit-Research-Collaborative.pdf

  • Organ, D. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (2006). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature, antecedents, and consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinney, C. (2009). Weathering the storm: The state of corporate citizenship in the United States 2009. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College Center for Corporate Citizenship.

    Google Scholar 

  • PollingReport.com. (2011, February 16–21). As far as people in charge of running are concerned, would you say you have a great deal of confidence, only some confidence, or hardly any confidence at all in them? The Harris Poll. Retrieved from http://www.pollingreport.com/institut.htm

  • Robbins, S., & Stylianou, A. C. (2003). Global corporate web sites: An empirical investigation of content and design. Information & Management, 40, 205–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, A. P. (2011). Giving by the numbers 2011. New York, NY: Committee Encouraging Corporate Philanthropy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, M. (1991). Coming to terms with the field: Understanding and doing organizational ethnography. Journal of Management Studies, 28(1), 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowley, T., & Berman, S. (2000). A brand new brand of corporate social performance. Business & Society, 39(4), 397–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saiia, D. H. (2001). Philanthropy and corporate citizenship: Strategic philanthropy is good corporate citizenship. The Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 2(2), 57–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samans, R. (2005). Partnering for success: Business perspectives on multistakeholder partnerships. Boston, MA: Harvard University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanzone, C. S. (2000). Securing corporate support: The business of corporate relations. In P. Buchanan (Ed.), Handbook of institutional advancement (3rd ed., pp. 321–324). Washington, DC: CASE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saul, J. (2011). The end of fundraising: Raise more money selling your impact. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schein, E. H. (1985). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sethi, S. P. (1973). Genius becomes rare. In D. Votaw & S. P. Sethi (Eds.), The corporate dilemma: Traditional values versus contemporary problems (pp. 214–231). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sethi, S. P. (1975). Dimensions of corporate social performance: An analytical framework. California Management Review, 17(3), 58–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shafritz, J. M., Ott, J. S., & Jang, Y. S. (2005). Classics of organization theory (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Thomson Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D. (2007). Constructive engagement with the corporation. Academe, 93(6), 52–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D. (2008). Framing involvement: Rationale construction in an inter-organizational collaboration. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 32(3), 221–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D. (2012). Beyond the academic-corporate divide. Academe, 98(1), 29–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sievers, B. (2004). Philanthropy’s blindspots. In H. P. Karoff (Ed.), Just money: A critique of contemporary American philanthropy (pp. 129–149). Boston: TPI Editions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sirsly, C.-A. T. (2009). 75 years of lessons learned: Chief executive officer values and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Management, 15(1), 78–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommerville, C. J. (2009). Universities are corporatized because they are secularized. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 55, 39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant observation. Orlando, FL: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steele, S. (2009, August 12–14). Research partnerships: Review of the PCAST report: University-private sector research partnerships in the innovation ecosystem. Presentation at the NACRO 3rd Annual Meeting, Seattle, WA. Retrieved from http://web.mac.com/nacro/NACRO/Toolbox.html

  • Swords, P. (2011). How to read the new IRS Form 990. Retrieved from http://www.npccny.org/new990/new990-1.htm

  • The 2010 Corporate Social Responsibility Index. (2010). The 2010 Corporate Social Responsibility Index. Retrieved from http://www.bcccc.net/pdf/CSRIReport2010.pdf

  • The Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University (COP). (2007). Corporate philanthropy: The age of integration. Indianapolis, IN: Indiana University. Retrieved from http://www.philanthropy.iupui.edu/files/research/corporate_giving_-_july_2007.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • The Clarkson Centre for Business Ethics. (1999). Principles for stakeholder management. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto.

    Google Scholar 

  • The State of Corporate Citizenship 2012 – Highlights. (2012). Retrieved from http://www.bcccc.net/pdf/SOCC2012HighlightPresentation.pdf

  • Thompson, J. D. (2005). Organizations in action. In J. Shafritz, J. Ott, & Y. Jang (Eds.), Classics of organization theory (6th ed., pp. 491–504). Boston, MA: Thomson Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • University-Industry Demonstration Project (UIDP). (2018). About Us. Retrieved from http://sites.nationalacademies.org/about-us/#about-us-section

  • Waddock, S. (2004). Parallel Universes: Companies, academics, and the progress of corporate citizenship. Business and Society Review, 109(1), 5–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welytok, J. G. (2006). Sarbanes-Oxley for dummies®. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, D. J., & Jones, R. E. (1995). Stakeholder mismatching: A theoretical problem in empirical research on corporate social performance. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 3(3), 229–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Post-doctoral Fellow in Corporate Social Responsibility and Global Business Ethics, Monarch Business School, Zug, Switzerland

    Morgan R. Clevenger

Authors
  1. Morgan R. Clevenger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

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

Clevenger, M.R. (2019). Contexts for Inter-organizational Engagement: Societal Concerns, Government Behavior, and Other Findings. In: Corporate Citizenship and Higher Education. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02447-5_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation