Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Understanding the behavioral gap: Why would managers (not) engage in CSR-related activities?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Management Control Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Within their day-to-day decision-making, managers face various decision-making scenarios that include CSR-related aspects. However, there is no certainty, that managers will consider these aspects while weighing up their options. This paper examines top-level managers’ intentions to engage in CSR-related activities as they determine the extent of potential management control problems that might result from managerial behavior that deviates from corporate expectations in these decision-making scenarios. According to the theory of planned behavior, intention is determined by three psychological constructs, namely attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control. We conduct two vignette surveys to examine the effect of the theory’s constructs on corporate CSR-related activities among German firms. Top-level managers participated in our study by completing an online questionnaire. Our results show that attitude towards CSR-related activities has a strong impact on the intentions to engage in certain activities. Furthermore, perceived behavioral control also influences top-level managers’ intentions to engage in CSR-related activities. However, the influence of subjective norm is not supported. Our findings provide important suggestions for the design of effective management control systems that set an important basis for long-term behavior, which is in line with corporate CSR-related goals and strategic objectives. Furthermore, our findings are relevant to governmental agencies, which seek to support the integration of CSR into corporate (core business) activities.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11–39). Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arjaliès, D.-L., & Mundy, J. (2013). The use of management control systems to manage CSR strategy: A levers of control perspective. Management Accounting Research, 24(4), 284–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (1999). Predictive validity of the theory of planned behaviour: The role of questionnaire format and social desirability. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 9(4), 261–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: A meta-analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40(4), 471–499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977). Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research, 14(3), 396–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Babiak, K., & Trendafilova, S. (2011). CSR and environmental responsibility: Motives and pressures to adopt green management practices. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 18(1), 11–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bassen, A., Jastram, S., & Meyer, K. (2005). Corporate social responsibility. Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts-und Unternehmensethik, 6(2), 231–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beck, L., & Ajzen, I. (1991). Predicting dishonest actions using the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 25(3), 285–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berry, A. J., Coad, A. F., Harris, E. P., Otley, D. T., & Stringer, C. (2009). Emerging themes in management control: A review of recent literature. The British Accounting Review, 41(1), 2–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, K. A., & Lennox, R. (1991). Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural equation perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 110(2), 305–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchan, H. F. (2005). Ethical decision making in the public accounting profession: An extension of Ajzen’s theory of planned behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 61(2), 165–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, T. D., & Reimers, J. L. (2005). Unethical and fraudulent financial reporting: Applying the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 60(2), 115–129.

    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 

  • Cavanagh, G. F., & Fritzsche, D. J. (1985). Using vignettes in business ethics research. In L. E. Preston (Ed.), Research in corporate social performance and policy: An annual compilation of research (Vol. 7, pp. 279–293). Greenwich Conn: Jai Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson, M. E. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 92–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, D. (1989). Organizational harm, legal condemnation and stakeholder retaliation: A typology, research agenda and application. Journal of Business Ethics, 8(1), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cordano, M., & Frieze, I. H. (2000). Pollution reduction preferences of U.S. environmental managers: Applying Ajzen’s theory of planned behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 627–641.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlmann, F., Branicki, L., & Brammer, S. (2017). ‘Carrots for Corporate Sustainability’: Impacts of incentive inclusiveness and variety on environmental performance. Business Strategy and the Environment, 26(8), 1110–1131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dex, S., & Scheibl, F. (2001). Flexible and family-friendly working arrangements in UK-based SMEs: Business cases. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 39(3), 411–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamantopoulos, A. (2008). Formative indicators: Introduction to the special issue. Journal of Business Research, 61(12), 1201–1202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamantopoulos, A., & Winklhofer, H. M. (2001). Index construction with formative indicators: An alternative to scale development. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 269–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ditillo, A., & Lisi, I. E. (2014). Towards a more comprehensive framework for sustainability control systems research. In M. Freedman & B. Jaggi (Eds.), Accounting for the environment: More talk and little progress (Vol. 5, pp. 23–47)., Advances in environmental accounting & management Emerald: Bingley.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ditillo, A., & Lisi, I. E. (2016). Exploring sustainability control systems integration: The relevance of sustainability orientation. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 28(2), 125–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dubinsky, A. J., & Loken, B. (1989). Analyzing ethical decision making in marketing. Journal of Business Research, 19(2), 83–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eberhardt-Toth, E., & Wasieleski, D. M. (2013). A cognitive elaboration model of sustainability decision making: Investigating financial managers’ orientation toward environmental issues. Journal of Business Ethics, 117(4), 735–751.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Endrikat, J., Hartmann, F., & Schreck, P. (2017). Social and ethical issues in management accounting and control: An editorial. Journal of Management Control, 28(3), 245–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engle, R. L., Dimitriadi, N., Gavidia, J. V., Schlaegel, C., Delanoe, S., Alvarado, I., et al. (2010). Entrepreneurial intent: A twelve-country evaluation of Ajzen’s model of planned behavior. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 16(1), 35–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EUROSTAT. (2018). Von Frauen besetzte Führungspositionen. http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&language=de&pcode=sdg_05_60&plugin=1. Accessed 16 August 2018.

  • Ferdous, A. S. (2010). Applying the theory of planned behavior to explain marketing managers’ perspectives on sustainable marketing. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 22(4), 313–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behaviour: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flannery, B. L., & May, D. R. (2000). Environmental ethical decision making in the U.S. metal-finishing industry. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 642–662.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franke, G. R., Preacher, K. J., & Rigdon, E. E. (2008). Proportional structural effects of formative indicators. Journal of Business Research, 61(12), 1229–1237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fritzsche, D. J., & Becker, H. (1984). Linking management behavior to ethical philosophy—An empirical investigation. Academy of Management Journal, 27(1), 166–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gadenne, D. L., Kennedy, J., & McKeiver, C. (2009). An empirical study of environmental awareness and practices in SMEs. Journal of Business Ethics, 84(1), 45–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galbreath, J. (2010). The impact of strategic orientation on corporate social responsibility. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 18(1), 23–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • George, J. F. (2004). The theory of planned behavior and Internet purchasing. Internet Research, 14(3), 198–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godos-Díez, J.-L., Fernández-Gago, R., & Martínez-Campillo, A. (2011). How important are CEOs to CSR practices? An analysis of the mediating effect of the perceived role of ethics and social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 98(4), 531–548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gond, J.-P., Grubnic, S., Herzig, C., & Moon, J. (2012). Configuring management control systems: Theorizing the integration of strategy and sustainability. Management Accounting Research, 23(3), 205–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goyal, P., & Kumar, D. (2017). Modeling the CSR barriers in manufacturing industries. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 24(7), 1871–1890.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graafland, J. J., Eijffinger, S. C., & Smid, H. (2004). Benchmarking of corporate social responsibility: Methodological problems and robustness. Journal of Business Ethics, 53(1–2), 137–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham-Rowe, E., Jessop, D. C., & Sparks, P. (2015). Predicting household food waste reduction using an extended theory of planned behaviour. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 101, 194–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guenther, E., Endrikat, J., & Guenther, T. W. (2016). Environmental management control systems: A conceptualization and a review of the empirical evidence. Journal of Cleaner Production, 136(Part A), 147–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hahn, T., Figge, F., Pinkse, J., & Preuss, L. (2010). Trade-offs in corporate sustainability: You can’t have your cake and eat it. Business Strategy and the Environment, 19(4), 217–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haller, A., & Durchschein, C. (2016). Entwicklung und Ausgestaltung der Prüfung von nach GRI-Normen erstellen Nachhaltigkeitsberichten in Deutschland. Zeitschrift für kapitalmarktorientierte Rechnungslegung, 4(16), 188–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hejjas, K., Miller, G., & Scarles, C. (2018). “It’s Like Hating Puppies!” Employee disengagement and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3791-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hemingway, C. A., & Maclagan, P. W. (2004). Managers’ personal values as drivers of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 50(1), 33–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henriques, I., & Sadorsky, P. (1999). The relationship between environmental commitment and managerial perceptions of stakeholder importance. Academy of Management Journal, 42(1), 87–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Houghton, S. M., Gabel, J. T. A., & Williams, D. W. (2009). Connecting the two faces of CSR: Does employee volunteerism improve compliance? Journal of Business Ethics, 87(4), 477–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarvis, C. B., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2003). A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(2), 199–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, S., Gruber, J., Reinthaler, M., & Klauenberg, J. (2016). Intentions to introduce electric vehicles in the commercial sector: A model based on the theory of planned behaviour. Research in Transportation Economics, 55, 12–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruse, D. L. (1992). Profit sharing and productivity: Microeconomic evidence from the United States. The Economic Journal, 102(410), 24–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurland, N. B. (1995). Ethical intentions and the theories of reasoned action and planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25(4), 297–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lueg, R., & Radlach, R. (2016). Managing sustainable development with management control systems: A literature review. European Management Journal, 34(2), 158–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, C. (2007). Boards, incentives and corporate social responsibility: The case for a change of emphasis. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15(5), 935–943.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maignan, I., & Ferrell, O. C. (2004). Corporate social responsibility and marketing: An integrative framework. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 32(1), 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malmi, T., & Brown, D. A. (2008). Management control systems as a package—Opportunities, challenges and research directions. Management Accounting Research, 19(4), 287–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 268–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazereeuw-van der Duijn Schouten, C., Graafland, J., & Kaptein, M. (2014). Religiosity, CSR attitudes, and CSR behavior: An empirical study of executives’ religiosity and CSR. Journal of Business Ethics, 123(3), 437–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merchant, K. A., & Van der Stede, W. A. (2017). Management control systems: Performance measurement, evaluation, and incentives. Harlow: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morsing, M., & Oswald, D. (2009). Sustainable leadership: Management control systems and organizational culture in Novo Nordisk A/S. Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society, 9(1), 83–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naffziger, D. W., Ahmed, N. U., & Montagno, R. V. (2003). Perceptions of environmental consciousness in US small businesses: An empirical study. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 68(2), 23–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norris, G., & O’Dwyer, B. (2004). Motivating socially responsive decision making: the operation of management controls in a socially responsive organisation. The British Accounting Review, 36(2), 173–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ooi, S. K., Amran, A., & Yeap, J. A. L. (2017). Defining and measuring strategic CSR: A formative construct. Global Business & Management Research, 9(4), 250–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orvis, K. A., Dudley, N. M., & Cortina, J. M. (2008). Conscientiousness and reactions to psychological contract breach: A longitudinal field study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(5), 1183–1193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Otley, D. T. (1980). The contingency theory of management accounting: Achievement and prognosis. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 5(4), 413–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, J., & Ha, S. (2012). Understanding pro-environmental behavior: A comparison of sustainable consumers and apathetic consumers. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 40(5), 388–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paulhus, D. L. (1984). Two-component models of socially desirable responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(3), 598–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paulhus, D. L. (2013). Measurement and control of response bias. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes: Measures of social psychological attitudes (pp. 17–59). San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pedersen, E. R. (2010). Modelling CSR: How managers understand the responsibilities of business towards society. Journal of Business Ethics, 91(2), 155–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pérez, A., & Rodríguez del Bosque, I. (2015). Corporate social responsibility and customer loyalty: Exploring the role of identification, satisfaction and type of company. Journal of Services Marketing, 29(1), 15–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perrini, F. (2006). SMEs and CSR theory: Evidence and implications from an Italian perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(3), 305–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 531–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pondeville, S., Swaen, V., & De Rongé, Y. (2013). Environmental management control systems: The role of contextual and strategic factors. Management Accounting Research, 24(4), 317–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poolthong, Y., & Mandhachitara, R. (2009). Customer expectations of CSR, perceived service quality and brand effect in Thai retail banking. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 27(6), 408–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pouta, E., & Rekola, M. (2001). The theory of planned behavior in predicting willingness to pay for abatement of forest regeneration. Society & Natural Resources, 14(2), 93–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz, P., Martinez, R., Rodrigo, J., & Diaz, C. (2015). Level of coherence among ethics program components and its impact on ethical intent. Journal of Business Ethics, 128(4), 725–742.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schaltegger, S., & Burritt, R. L. (2010). Sustainability accounting for companies: Catchphrase or decision support for business leaders? Journal of World Business, 45(4), 375–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, S. (2000). Managerial interpretations and organizational context as predictors of corporate choice of environmental strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 681–697.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, S., & Henriques, I. (2005). Stakeholder influences on sustainability practices in the Canadian forest products industry. Strategic Management Journal, 26(2), 159–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singhapakdi, A., Karande, K., Rao, C. P., & Vitell, S. J. (2001). How important are ethics and social responsibility? A multinational study of marketing professionals. European Journal of Marketing, 35(1/2), 133–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sobczak, A., Debucquet, G., & Havard, C. (2006). The impact of higher education on students’ and young managers’ perception of companies and CSR: An exploratory analysis. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 6(4), 463–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thoradeniya, P., Lee, J., Tan, R., & Ferreira, A. (2015). Sustainability reporting and the theory of planned behaviour. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 28(7), 1099–1137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, T., & Bansal, P. (2012). Social responsibility in new ventures: Profiting from a long-term orientation. Strategic Management Journal, 33(10), 1135–1153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, J. A. (2007). Business ethics training: Insights from learning theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 70(1), 61–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M. (2008). The business case for corporate social responsibility: A company-level measurement approach for CSR. European Management Journal, 26(4), 247–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Widener, S. K. (2007). An empirical analysis of the levers of control framework. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 32(7–8), 757–788.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Windolph, S. E., Schaltegger, S., & Herzig, C. (2014). Implementing corporate sustainability. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 5(4), 378–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winkler, N., Kroh, M., & Spiess, M. (2018). Entwicklung einer deutschen Kurzskala zur zweidimensionalen Messung von sozialer Erwünschtheit. DIW Discussion Paper No. 579. DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research. https://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/44281/dp579.pdf. Accessed 26 September 2018.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Chair of Accounting, Department of Business Administration and Economics, Heinrich Heine University Duesseldorf, Universitaetsstraße 1, Building 23.31 01.25, 40225, Duesseldorf, Germany

    Madeleine Feder & Barbara E. Weißenberger

Authors
  1. Madeleine Feder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Barbara E. Weißenberger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Madeleine Feder.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 7.

Table 7 Appendix—Questionnaire items
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Feder, M., Weißenberger, B.E. Understanding the behavioral gap: Why would managers (not) engage in CSR-related activities?. J Manag Control 30, 95–126 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00187-019-00275-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00187-019-00275-y

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation