Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Organizing Corporate Social Responsibility in Small and Large Firms: Size Matters

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

Abstract

Based on the findings of a qualitative empirical study of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in Swiss MNCs and SMEs, we suggest that smaller firms are not necessarily less advanced in organizing CSR than large firms. Results according to theoretically derived assessment frameworks illustrate the actual implementation status of CSR in organizational practices. We propose that small firms possess several organizational characteristics that are favorable for promoting the internal implementation of CSR-related practices in core business functions, but constrain external communication and reporting about CSR. In contrast, large firms possess several characteristics that are favorable for promoting external communication and reporting about CSR, but at the same time constrain internal implementation. We sketch a theoretical explanation of these differences in organizing CSR in MNCs and SMEs based on the relationship between firm size and relative organizational costs.

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

Notes

  1. see http://www.unglobalcompact.org

  2. see http://www.wbcsd.org

  3. see http://www.gri.org

  4. We follow the broad definition of the European Commission of an SME having fewer than 250 employees (EC 2003).

  5. Nestlé’s engagement in the UN Global Compact Water Mandate was just starting in 2007 and therefore it did not feature in this analysis. Today however, the interactive aspects of Nestlé’s CSR engagement could be placed in the strategic stage.

References

  • Banerjee, S. (2007). Corporate social responsibility: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumann, D. (2009). Global rules: Private actors. The role of the multinational corporation in global governance. Doctoral dissertation. Zurich: University of Zurich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumann-Pauly, D., & Scherer, A. (2012). The organizational implementation of corporate citizenship: An assessment tool and its application at UN Global Compact participants. Journal of Business Ethics,. doi:10.1007/s10551-012-1502-4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumann-Pauly, D., Scherer, A., & Palazzo, G. (2012). Navigating through paradoxical stakeholder expectations: Organizational implications of managing corporate legitimacy in complex environments. Zurich: University of Zurich. Institute of Business Administration. UZH Business Working Paper No 321.

  • Becker, G., & Murphy, K. (1992). The division of labor, coordination costs, and knowledge. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107(4), 1137–1160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P. (1970). Formal theory of differentiation in organizations. American Sociological Review, 35(2), 201–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blombäck, A., & Wigren, C. (2009). Challenging the importance of size as determinant for CSR activities. Management of Environmental Quality, 20(3), 255–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camacho, A. (1991). Adaptation cost, coordination cost and optimal firm size. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 15, 137–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. (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 

  • Courrent, J.-M., & Gundolf, K. (2009). Proximity and micro-enterprise manager’s ethics: A French empirical study of responsible business attitudes. Journal of Business Ethics, 88(4), 749–762.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dhaliwal, D., Li, O., Tsang, A., & Yang, Y. (2011). Voluntary nonfinancial disclosure and the cost of equity capital: The initiation of corporate social responsibility reporting. The Accounting Review, 86, 59–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Downs, A. (1966). Bureaucratic structure and decision making. Santa Monica: Rand.

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (European Commission). (2003). Recommendation 2003/361/EC regarding the SME definition. Brussels: European Commission.

  • Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez, M., & Randall, D. (1992). The nature of social desirability response effects in ethics research. Journal of Business Ethics, 2(2), 183–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gamerschlag, R., Möller, K., & Verbeeten, F. (2011). Determinants of voluntary CSR disclosure: Empirical evidence from Germany. Review of Managerial Science, 5, 233–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies of qualitative research. London: Wiedenfeld & Nicholson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graafland, J., van de Ven, B., & Stoffele, N. (2003). Strategies and instruments for organising CSR by small and large businesses in the Netherlands. Journal of Business Ethics, 47, 45–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haack, P., Schoeneborn, D., & Wickert, C. (2012). Talking the talk, moral entrapment, creeping commitment? Exploring narrative dynamics in corporate responsibility standardization. Organization Studies, 33(5/6), 815–845.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammann, E., Habisch, A., & Pechlaner, H. (2009). Values that create value: Socially responsible business practices in SMEs—Empirical evidence from German companies. Business Ethics, 18(1), 37–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jamali, D., Zanhour, M., & Keshishian, T. (2009). Peculiar strengths and relational attributes of SMEs in the context of CSR. Journal of Business Ethics, 87, 355–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, H. (2004). A critique of conventional CSR theory: An SME perspective. Journal of General Management, 29, 55–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jorgensen, A., & Knudsen, J. (2006). Sustainable competitiveness in global value chains: How do small Danish firms behave? Corporate Governance, 6(4), 449–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knudsen, J. (2011). Company delistings from the UN Global Compact: Limited business demand or domestic governance failure? Journal of Business Ethics, 103, 331–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1996). What firms do? Coordination, identity, and learning. Organization Science, 7(5), 502–519.

    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 

  • Lindgreen, A., Swaen, V., & Maon, F. (2009). Introduction: Corporate social responsibility implementation. Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 251–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malone, T. (1987). Modeling coordination in organizations and markets. Management Science, 33, 1317–1332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maon, F., Lindgreen, A., & Swaen, V. (2010). Organizational stages and cultural phases: Critical review and a consolidative model of CSR development. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12, 20–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirvis, P., & Googins, B. (2006). Stages of corporate citizenship. California Management Review, 48(2), 104–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murillo, D., & Lozano, J. (2006). CSR and SMEs: An approach to CSR in their own words. Journal of Business Ethics, 67, 227–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedersen, E. (2009). The many and the few: Rounding up the SMEs that manage CSR in the supply chain. Supply Chain Management, 14(2), 109–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preuss, L., & Perschke, J. (2010). Slipstreaming the larger boats: Social responsibility in medium-sized businesses. Journal of Business Ethics, 92, 531–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, J. (1997). Personal ethics and business ethics: The ethical attitudes of owner-managers of small business. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 119–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ram, M., Edwards, P., Gilman, M., & Arrowsmith, J. (2001). The dynamics of informality: Employment relations in small firms and the effects of regulatory change. Work, Employment & Society, 15, 845–861.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasche, A. (2009). A necessary supplement—What the United Nations Global Compact is (not). Business & Society, 48(5), 11–537.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasche, A., & Kell, G. (2010). The United Nations Global Compact: Achievements, trends and challenges. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Reverte, C. (2012). The impact of better corporate social responsibility disclosure on the cost of equity capital. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 19, 253–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russo, A., & Perrini, F. (2009). Investigating stakeholder theory and social capital: CSR in large firms and SMEs. Journal of Business Ethics, 91, 207–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russo, A., & Tencati, A. (2009). Formal vs. informal CSR strategies: Evidence from Italian micro, small, mediumsized, and large firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(2), 339–353.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, A., & Palazzo, G. (2007). Toward a political conception of corporate responsibility. Business and society seen from a Habermasian perspective. Academy of Management Review, 32, 1096–1120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, A., Palazzo, G., & Baumann, D. (2006). Global rules and private actors—Towards a new role of the transnational corporation in global governance. Business Ethics Quarterly, 16, 505–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, A. G., & Palazzo, G. (2011). The new political role of business in a globalized world: A review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance, and democracy. Journal of Management Studies, 48(4), 899–931.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. (2004). Small firm accountability and integrity. In G. Brenkert (Ed.), Corporate integrity and accountability (p. 115). London: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. (2007). CSR and small business in a European policy context: The five ‘C’s of CSR and small business research agenda 2007. Business and Society Review, 112, 533–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L., Schmidpeter, R., & Habisch, A. (2003). Assessing social capital: Small and medium sized enterprises in Germany and the UK. Journal of Business Ethics, 47, 17–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNGC. (2011). United Nations Global Compact annual review 2010. New York: United Nations Global Compact Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Marrewijk, M., & Werre, M. (2003). Multiple levels of corporate sustainability. Journal of Business Ethics, 44, 107–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Weltzien Hoivik, H., & Melè, D. (2009). Can SME become a global corporate citizen? Evidence from a case study. Journal of Business Ethics, 88, 551–563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, T., Lutz, R., & Weitz, B. (2009). Corporate hypocrisy: Overcoming the threat of inconsistent corporate social responsibility perceptions. Journal of Marketing, 73, 77–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wickert, C. (2011a). Organizing “political” corporate social responsibility in small- and medium-sized enterprises: A conceptual framework. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Annual Meeting 2011, San Antonio, Texas (USA).

  • Wickert, C. (2011b). Small- and medium-sized enterprises as private actors in global governance—Evidence from a case study among Swiss SMEs in the textile industry. IBW Working Paper Series: 121. Zurich: University of Zurich.

  • Williamson, O. (1967). Hierarchical control and optimum firm size. The Journal of Political Economy, 75(2), 123–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Windsor, D. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: Three key approaches. Journal of Management Studies, 43, 93–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, I. (2004). Responsibility and global labor justice. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 12(4), 365–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, I. (2006). Responsibility and global justice: A social connection model. Social Philosophy & Policy, 23(1), 102–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zadek, S. (2004). The path to corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 82, 125–132.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the editors and anonymous reviewers for the helpful comments on previous drafts of this paper. Dorothée Baumann-Pauly and Andreas Georg Scherer acknowledge the financial support by the SNSF Swiss National Science Foundation. Christopher Wickert and Andreas Georg Scherer acknowledge the financial support by the SNIS Swiss Network for International Studies.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Business and Economics, University of Lausanne, Quartier Dorigny, Batiment Internef, 1015, Lausanne, Switzerland

    Dorothée Baumann-Pauly

  2. Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Department of Management and Organisation, VU University Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Christopher Wickert

  3. Centre for Research into Sustainability, School of Management, Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, Surrey, TW20 OEX, UK

    Laura J. Spence

  4. Chair of Foundations of Business Administration and Theories of the Firm, Department of Business Administration, University of Zurich, Universitaetsstrasse 84, Zurich, Switzerland

    Andreas Georg Scherer

Authors
  1. Dorothée Baumann-Pauly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christopher Wickert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Laura J. Spence
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Andreas Georg Scherer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christopher Wickert.

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables 1 and 2

Table 1 Stages and dimensions of CSR
Full size table
Table 2 Overview of empirical results showing degree of activity along each dimension of CSR engagement
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Baumann-Pauly, D., Wickert, C., Spence, L.J. et al. Organizing Corporate Social Responsibility in Small and Large Firms: Size Matters. J Bus Ethics 115, 693–705 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1827-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1827-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation