Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Slipstreaming the Larger Boats: Social Responsibility in Medium-Sized Businesses

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Studies into corporate social responsibility (CSR) in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) have suggested that small businesses are different to the large companies on which CSR research usually focusses. Extending this argument, this article raises the question what differences in approaches to CSR there are within the SME category. Analysing the CSR strategy and performance of a medium-sized fashion retailer in the United Kingdom through manager interviews as well as customer and employee surveys, the article develops an analytical framework of CSR in small, medium and large firms. The argument is developed that medium-sized firms occupy a transition stage, where some CSR features that are reminiscent of small enterprises are still important but get overlaid with aspects that are more typical of large companies.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ang, J.: 1991, ‹Small Business Uniqueness and the Theory of Financial Management’, Journal of Small Business Finance 1 (1), 1-13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arndt, O. and R. Sternberg: 2000, ‹Do Manufacturing Firms Profit from Intra-Regional Innovation Linkages? An Empirical-Based Answer’, European Planning Studies 8 (4), 465-485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atkins, M. and J. Lowe: 1994, ‹Stakeholders and the Strategy Formation Process in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises’, International Small Business Journal 12 (3), 12-24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. B.: 1991, Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage, Journal of Management 17 (1), 99-120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaver, G. and C. Prince: 2004, ‹Management, Strategy and Policy in the UK Small Business Sector: A Critical Review’, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development 11 (1), 34-49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berman, S. L.; A. C. Wicks, S. Kotha and T. M. Jones: 1999, ‹Does Stakeholder Orientation Matter? The Relationship between Stakeholder Management Models and Firm Financial Performance’, Academy of Management Journal 42 (5), 488-506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BERR: 2008, SME Statistics for the UK and Regions 2007. (Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, London). http://stats.berr.gov.uk/ed/sme/smestats2007.XLS#’UK Private Sector’!A1. Last accessed 10 Nov 2008.

  • Besser, T. L. and N. Miller: 2001, ‹Is the Good Corporation Dead? The Community Social Responsibility of Small Business Operators’, Journal of Socio-Economics 33 (6), 221-241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharya, C. B. and S. Sen: 2004, ‹Doing Better at Doing Good: When, Why, and How Consumers Respond to Corporate Social Initiatives’, California Management Review 47 (1), 9-24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhidé, A. V.: 2000, The Origin and Evolution of New Businesses (Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonaccorsi, A.: 1992, ‹On the Relationship between Firm Size and Export Intensity’, Journal of International Business Studies 23 (4), 605-635.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brunninge, O.; Nordqvist, M. and J. Wiklund: 2007, ‹Corporate Governance and Strategic Change in SMEs: The Effects of Ownership, Board Composition and Top Management Teams’, Small Business Economics 29 (3), 295-308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B.: 1999, ‹Corporate Social Responsibility: Evolution of a Definitional Construct’, Business and Society 38 (3), 268-295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casson, M.: 2003, ‹Entrepreneurship, Business Culture and the Theory of the Firm’, in Z. J. Acs and D. B. Audretsch (eds), Handbook of Entrepreneurship Research: An Interdisciplinary Survey and Introduction (Kluwer, Boston, Dordrecht and London), pp. 223-246.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson, M. B. E.: 1995, ‹A Stakeholder Framework for Analyzing and Evaluating Corporate Social Performance’, Academy of Management Review 20 (1), 92-117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coase, R. H.: 1937, ‹The Nature of the Firm’, Economica, New Series 4(16), 386–405.

  • Cowling, M.: 2003, ‹Productivity and Corporate Governance in Smaller Firms’, Small Business Economics 20 (4), 335-344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dandridge, T. C.: 1979, ‹Children are not “Little Grown-Ups”: Small Business Needs its own Organizational Theory’, Journal of Small Business Management 17 (2), 53-58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Datamonitor: 2007, Textiles in the United Kingdom: Industry Profile (Datamonitor, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • de Bakker, F. G. A. and F. den Hond: 2008, ‹Introducing the Politics of Stakeholder Influence: A Review Essay’, Business & Society 47 (1), 8-20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EC: 2002, European SMEs and Social and Environmental Responsibility (European Commission, Directorate-General Enterprise and Industry, Brussels). http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/enterprise_policy/analysis/doc/smes_observatory_2002_report4_en.pdf. Last accessed 10 Nov 2008.

  • EC: 2003, Recommendation 2003/361/EC Regarding the SME Definition (European Commission, Directorate-General Enterprise and Industry, Brussels). http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/enterprise_policy/sme_definition/index_en.htm. Last accessed 10 Nov 2008.

  • Eisenhardt, K. E.: 1989, ‹Building Theory from Case Study Research’, Academy of Management Review 14 (4), 532-550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fama, E. F. and M. C. Jensen: 1983, ‹Separation of Ownership and Control’, Journal of Law and Economics 26 (2), 301-325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, J. M. and M. Klofsten: 2000, Medium-sized firms and the limits to growth: A case study in the evolution of a spin-off firm, European Planning Studies 8 (5): 631-650.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freel, M. S.: 2003, ‹Sectoral Patterns of Small Firm Innovation, Networking and Proximity, Research Policy 32 (5), 751-770.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garriga, E. and D. Melé.: 2004, “Corporate Social Responsibility Theories: Mapping the Territory”, Journal of Business Ethics 53 (1-2), pp. 51-71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghauri, P.: 2004, ‹Designing and Conducting Case Studies in International Business’, in R. Marschan-Piekkari and C. Welch (eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods for International Business (Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham), pp. 109-124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey, P. C and N. W. Hatch: 2007, ‹Researching Corporate Social Responsibility: An Agenda for the 21st Century’, Journal of Business Ethics 70 (1), 87-98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graafland, J. J.: 2002, ‹Sourcing Ethics in the Textile Sector: The Case of C&A’, Business Ethics: A European Review 11(3), 282–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R.: 2006, ‹Social, Environmental and Sustainability Reporting and Organisational Value Creation? Whose Value? Whose Creation?’, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 19 (6), pp. 793-819.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gummesson, E.: 2000, Qualitative Methods in Management Research, 2nd edition (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammersley, M. and R. Gomm: 2000, ‹Introduction’, in R. Gomm, M. Hammersley and P. Foster (eds) Case Study Method (Sage, London), pp. 1-16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausman, A.: 2005, ‹Innovativeness among Small Businesses: Theory and Propositions for Future Research’, Industrial Marketing Management 34 (8), 773-782.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, A. J.; 2005, ‹Politicians on the Board of Directors: Do Connections Affect the Bottom Line?’, Journal of Management 31 (3), 464-481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hine, J. A. H. S. and L. Preuss: 2008, ‹“Society is Out There, Organisation is in Here”: On the Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility Held by Different Managerial Groups’, Journal of Business Ethics. doi 10.1007/s10551-008-9970-2.

  • Hodge, M.: 2006, ‹The British CSR Strategy: How the Government Supports the Good Work’, in J. Hennigfield, M. Poole and N. Tolhurst (Eds) The ICCA Handbook on Corporate Social Responsibility (John Wiley and Sons, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Husted, B.: 2007, Corporate Social Strategy in Multinational Enterprises: Antecedents and Value Creation’, Journal of Business Ethics 74 (4), 345-361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins H.: 2004, ‹A Critique of Conventional CSR Theory: An SME Perspective’, Journal of General Management 29 (4), 37-57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, H.: 2006, ‹Small Business Champions for Corporate Social Responsibility’, Journal of Business Ethics 67 (3), 24-256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C. and W. H. Meckling: 1976, ‹Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behaviour, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure’, Journal of Financial Economics 3 (4), 305-360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonker, J. and M. de Witte: 2006, The Challenge of Organizing and Implementing Corporate Social Responsibility (Palgrave, Basingstoke).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman, A., E. Tiantubtim, N. Pussayapibul and P. Davids: 2004, ‹Implementing Voluntary Labour Standards and Codes of Conduct in the Thai Garment Industry’, Journal of Corporate Citizenship 13, 91-99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kobe, K.: 2007, The Small Business Share of GDP, 1998–2004 (Office of Advocacy of the U.S. Small Business Administration, Washington, DC). http://www.sba.gov/advo/research/rs299tot.pdf. Last accessed 10 Nov 2008.

  • Kruger, N. F. Jr.: 2003, ‹The Cognitive Psychology of Entrepreneurship’, in Z. J. Acs and D. B. Audretsch (eds), Handbook of Entrepreneurship Research: An Interdisciplinary Survey and Introduction (Kluwer, Boston, Dordrecht and London), pp. 105-140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurucz, E.; B. Colbert & D. Wheeler: 2008, ‹The Business Case for Corporate Social Responsibility. In A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon & D. S. Siegel (Eds)The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility (Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp 83-112).

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lane, C. and J. Probert: 2004, ‹Between the Global and the Local: A Comparison of the German and UK Clothing Industry’, Competition & Change 8 (3), 243-266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laszlo, C.: 2008, Sustainable Value: How the World’s Leading Companies are Doing Well by Doing Good (Greenleaf, Sheffield).

    Google Scholar 

  • Leipziger, D.: 2003, The Corporate Responsibility Code Book (Greenleaf Publishing, Sheffield).

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, H.: 1995, ‹Market Orientation and Firm Size: An Empirical Examination’, European Journal of Marketing 29 (1), 57-71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, C.: 1982, The Survey Method: The Contribution of Surveys to Sociological Explanation (Allen & Unwin, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A. and Siegel, D. S.: 2001, “Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective”, Academy of Management Review 26 (1), pp. 117-127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B. and A. M. Huberman: 1994, Qualitative Data Analysis, 2nd ed. (Sage, Newbury Park, CA).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R. K.; B. R. Agle and D. J. Wood: 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, G. and L. J. Spence: 2006, ‹Editorial: Responsibility and Small Business’, Journal of Business Ethics 67(3), 219–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murillo, D. and J. M. Lozano: 2006, ‹SMEs and CSR: An Approach to CSR in their Own Words’, Journal of Business Ethics 67 (3), 227-240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penrose, E. T.: 1959, The Theory of the Growth of the Firm (Wiley, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrini, F., A. Russo and A. Tencati: 2007, ‹CSR Strategies of SMEs and Large Firms. Evidence from Italy’, Journal of Business Ethics 74 (3), 285-300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Portes, A.: 1998, ‹Social Capital: Its Origins and Applications in Modern Sociology’, Annual Review of Sociology 24, 1-24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preuss, L.: 2005, The Green Multiplier: A Study of Environmental Protection and the Supply Chain (Palgrave, Basingstoke).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, P. H.: 1973, The Expansion of Firms, Journal of Political Economy 81(4), 936–949.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sako, M.: 2004, Supplier Development at Honda, Nissan and Toyota: Comparative Case Studies of Organizational Capability Enhancement, Industrial and Corporate Change 13 (2), 281-308.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaltegger, S., & M. Wagner: 2006, Managing the business case for sustainability (Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing).

    Google Scholar 

  • Seitanidi, M. M. and A. Crane: 2009, ‹Implementing CSR through Partnerships: Understanding the Selection, Design and Institutionalisation of Nonprofit-Business Partnerships, Journal of Business Ethics 85 (S2), 413-429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seuring, S., M. Goldbach and J. Koplin: 2004, ‹Managing Time and Complexity in Supply Chains: Two Cases from the Textile Industry’, International Journal of Integrated Supply Management 1 (2): 180-198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H.: 1992, ‹Lessons from Germany’s Midsize Giants’, Harvard Business Review 70(2), 115–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slater, M.: 1980, The Managerial Limitation to a Firm’s Rate of Growth, Economic Journal 90 (359), 520–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. J. and R. Schmidpeter: 2003, ‹SMEs, Social Capital and the Common Good’, Journal of Business Ethics 45 (1-2), 93-108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stake, R. E.: 2000, ‹Case Studies’, in N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2nd edition (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA), pp. 435-454.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanworth, M. and J. Curran: 1976, ‹Growth and the Small Firm: An Alternative View’, Journal of Management Studies 13 (2), 95-110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Storey, D. J.: 2002, ‹Education, Training and Development Policies and Practices in Medium-Sized Companies in the UK: Do They Really Influence Firm Performance?’, Omega 30 (4), 249-264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J. K. and H. L. Smith: 1991, ‹Social Responsibility and Small Business: Suggestions for Research’, Journal of Small Business Management 29, 39-44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vyakarnam, S., A. Bailey, A. Myers and D. Burnett: 1997, ‹Towards an Understanding of Ethical Behaviour in Small Firms’, Journal of Business Ethics 16 (15), 1625-1636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welsh, J. A. and J. F. White: 1981, ‹A Small Business Is Not a Little Big Business’, Harvard Business Review 59 (4), 18-32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wernerfelt, B.: 1984, A Resource-Based View of the Firm, Strategic Management Journal 5 (2), 171-180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westhead, P.: 1995, ‹Exporting and Non-Exporting Small Firms in Great Britain’, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research 1 (2), 6-36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, A.: 1999, ‹Employment Relations in SMEs’, Employee Relations 21 (3), 206-217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E.: 1985, The Economic Institutions of Capitalism: Firms, Markets, Relational Contracting (Free Press, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K.: 2003, Case Study Research: Design and Methods (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Management, Royal Holloway College, University of London, Egham, Surrey, U.K.

    Lutz Preuss

  2. Advisory Services, Ernst & Young, London, U.K.

    Jack Perschke

Authors
  1. Lutz Preuss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jack Perschke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lutz Preuss.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Preuss, L., Perschke, J. Slipstreaming the Larger Boats: Social Responsibility in Medium-Sized Businesses. J Bus Ethics 92, 531–551 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0171-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0171-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation