Corporate Social Responsibility in a Comparative Perspective

Comparative studies of corporate social responsibility (CSR) are relatively rare, certainly as contrasted with other related fields, such as comparative corporate governance or comparative corporate law. This is to be expected in a field, CSR, that is still Moreover, the field of empirical CSR research generally has been hampered by the lack of a consistent definition of the construct of CSR, as well as its operationalization and measurement, as recently pointed out by McWilliams et al. (2006) and Rodriguez et al. (2006). This lack of consistency of CSR definitions across studies makes it difficult to evaluate and compare the findings from different studies because they usually refer to different dimensions of CSR. Most research on CSR has focused on the consequences of CSR implementation-or lack of implementation-on financial performance with little attention to comparative issues (e.g. McWilliams and Siegel, 2000; Margolis and Walsh, 2003; Barnett and Salomon, 2006), the main exception being a meta-analysis which includes studies conducted in the context of different countries (Orlitzky et al., 2003). We know, however, from existing research that individuals are likely to have distinct expectations and attitudes towards CSR contingent on the industry (Bansal and Roth, 2000; Strike et al., 2006) or societal culture (Waldman et al., 2006) in which they are embedded

Corporate Social Responsibility in a Comparative Perspective

Comparative studies of corporate social responsibility (CSR) are relatively rare, certainly as contrasted with other related fields, such as comparative corporate governance or comparative corporate law. This is to be expected in a field, CSR, that is still Moreover, the field of empirical CSR research generally has been hampered by the lack of a consistent definition of the construct of CSR, as well as its operationalization and measurement, as recently pointed out by McWilliams et al. (2006) and Rodriguez et al. (2006). This lack of consistency of CSR definitions across studies makes it difficult to evaluate and compare the findings from different studies because they usually refer to different dimensions of CSR. Most research on CSR has focused on the consequences of CSR implementation-or lack of implementation-on financial performance with little attention to comparative issues (e.g. McWilliams and Siegel, 2000; Margolis and Walsh, 2003; Barnett and Salomon, 2006), the main exception being a meta-analysis which includes studies conducted in the context of different countries (Orlitzky et al., 2003). We know, however, from existing research that individuals are likely to have distinct expectations and attitudes towards CSR contingent on the industry (Bansal and Roth, 2000; Strike et al., 2006) or societal culture (Waldman et al., 2006) in which they are embedded

A Configurational Approach to Comparative Corporate Governance

We seek to bring to the core of the study of comparative corporate governance analysis the idea that within countries and industries, there exist multiple configurations of firm level characteristics and governance practices leading to effective corporate governance. In particular, we propose that configurations composed of different bundles of corporate governance practices are a useful tool to examine corporate governance models across and within countries (as well as potentially to analyze over time changes). While comparative research, identifying stylized national models of corporate governance, has been fruitful to help us think about the key institutional and shareholder rights determining governance differences and similarities across countries, we believe that given the financialization of the corporate economy, current globalization trends of investment, and rapid information technology advances, it is important to shift our conceptualization of governance models beyond the dichotomous world of common-law/outsider/shareholder-oriented system vs. civil law/insider/stakeholder oriented system. Our claim is based on the empirical observation that there exists a wide range of firms that either (1) fall in the "wrong" corporate governance category; (2) are a hybrid of these two categories; or (3) should be placed into an entirely new category such as firms in emerging markets or state-owned firms. In addition, as Aguilera and Jackson (2003) argue, firms, regardless of their legal family constraints, their labor and product markets, and the development of the financial markets from which they can draw, have significant degrees of freedom to chose whether to implement different levels of a given corporate governance practice. That is, firms might chose to fully endorse a practice or simply seek to comply with the minimum requirements without truly internalizing the governance practice. An illustrative example of the different degrees of internalization of governance practices is the existing variation in firms' definition of director independence or disclosure of compensation systems. We first discuss the conceptual idea of configurations or bundles of corporate governance practices underscoring the concept of equifinal paths to given firm outcomes as well as the complementarity and substitution in governance practices. We then move to the practice level of analysis to show how three governance characteristics (legal systems, ownership and boards of directors) cannot be conceptualized independently, as each of them is contingent on the strength and prevalence of other governance practices. In the last section, we illustrate how different configurations are likely to playout across industries and countries, taking as the departing practice, corporate ownership.

Twenty years of ‘Law and Finance’: time to take law seriously

This ‘state of the art’ essay provides a comprehensive discussion of the Law and Finance School (LFS) literature. We show that the first two decades of the LFS have focused on empirically investigating the question ‘does law matter?’ Yet, despite the centrality of law to the LFS, it is based on an incoherent theory of law, which leads to shortcomings in the conceptualization and empirical testing of its hypotheses. We also observe that, rather than addressing this deficiency, the LFS has moved its focus to the contentious concept of ‘legal origin’. We argue that the LFS needs to take law more seriously by returning to its initial focus on the substance of legal rules and by addressing the theoretical question ‘how does law matter?’ We propose venues for future research to develop a solid theoretical framework that would put the empirical investigation of law’s impact on economic outcomes on a more solid footing

Corporate Governance in Emerging Markets

The turning to the XXI century has been marked by reforms in corporate governance practices around the world. Whether due to shocks caused by the economic crisis in East Asia, Russia and Latin America, or by financial scandals in the United States and Europe, the fact is that the way of doing business has changed in terms of demands for greater corporate transparency and accountability, shifts in control of ownership, empowerment of new types of owners and so on. Consequently, countries and firms have adapted their corporate governance policies and practices to this new governance environment. In this chapter, we discuss the foundation of corporate governance, that is, corporate ownership. In particular, we explore the current patterns of the ownership structure of publicly listed firms in six emerging countries. To do so, we have collected firm ownership data for listed firms in Brazil, Chile, South Korea, Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland during the first decade of the XXI century, and we compare our data with existing ownership research of these countries in the late 1990s. We conclude that although concentration of corporate shareholdings continues to be a common denominator among these emerging countries, the processes and structures controlling firms across countries is remarkably different. For instance, the privatization process in the 1990s, in spite of having different motivations and goals in Latin American and Eastern Europe shaped much of the corporate ownership transformations. Our chapter offers a comparative analysis of the corporate ownership changes in emerging markets.

The systemic governance influence of universal owners: evidence from an expectation document

Universal owners - large institutional investors with highly diversified and long-term portfolios spanning the entire global capital market - have multiple engagement mechanisms to influence their portfolio companies. Given the costly nature of firm-specific interventions, universal owners have also drawn on systemic governance mechanisms with a wide market effect and low cost such as expectation documents. We focus on Norway’s sovereign wealth fund and its release of an unforeseen key expectation Note in 2012 requesting explicit corporate governance practices from all its portfolio companies. We use this early example of an expectation Note as a natural experiment to examine whether expectation documents have impactful governance consequences for the entire market. We develop a new three-step decomposition approach to explore the effectiveness of expectation documents as an activism mechanism. First, we analyze how portfolio firms adapted to the fund’s new governance expectations and explore their heterogeneous response across ownership levels and firm characteristics. We find a stronger reaction by firms for which direct action is more costly to universal owners. Second, we show how the fund also changed its investment policy to meet its newly stated governance preferences, even at the expense of its financial returns. And finally, we illustrate the new correlation between the firms’ changes toward higher governance scores and the fund’s changes in the investment weights. With this study, we contribute to research on shareholder stewardship by examining a novel and effective governance engagement tactic which is becoming popular in an era of raising pressures for corporations to pursue purpose

Bridging accounting and corporate governance: new avenues of research

This paper draws on the articles in the Forum on Corporate Governance to discuss how corporate governance and accounting research complement each other well in explaining how companies are governed as well as properly managed from an accounting point of view. We put special attention to the cross-national differences in both corporate governance systems and accounting practice and how that affect multiple organizational outcomes ranging from financial performance to corporate social performance and reporting quality

Corporate Governance Deviance

We develop the concept of corporate governance deviance and seek to understand why, when, and how a firm adopts governance practices that do not conform to the dominant governance logic. Drawing on institutional theory, coupled with both the entrepreneurship and corporate governance literature, we advance a middle-range theory of the antecedents of corporate governance deviance that considers both the institutional context and firm-level agency. Specifically, we highlight the centrality of a firm\u27s entrepreneurial identity as it interacts with the national governance logic to jointly create corporate governance discretion (i.e., the latitude of accessible governance practices) within the firm. We argue that as a firm\u27s governance discretion increases, it will be more likely to adopt overconforming or underconforming governance practices that deviate from established norms and practices. Moreover, we propose that adopting a deviant corporate governance practice is contingent on the governance regulatory environment and a firm\u27s corporate governance capacity. We conclude by advancing a new typology of corporate governance deviance based on a firm\u27s over- or underconformity with the dominant national logic, as well as its entrepreneurial identity motives. This globally relevant study refines and extends comparative corporate governance research and enriches our current understanding of the institutional logics perspective

Normalización del consumo de alcohol como factor de riesgo

En España el consumo de alcohol es una costumbre que se realiza tanto durante la comida, como para celebrar acontecimientos importantes y en reuniones sociales. Un hábito que lleva a banalizar su ingesta tanto es así que se podría llegar a considerar un factor de riesgo a la hora de consumir y crear una dependencia delalcohol. Y este es el principal objetivo de este trabajo, averiguar si la normalización existe, si es un factor de riesgo y si los jóvenes están siguiendo estas costumbres que ya tenemos asimiladas como parte de nuestra cultura, si sus hábitos de consumo están cambiando y si también lo asumen como algo habitual. Para esto se han buscado y analizado varios artículos y publicaciones relacionadas con este tema que nos han ayudado a esclarecerlo o al menos a entender mejor los hábitos de consumo de la población española y que concepción tienen de esta sustancia.In Spain, the consumption of alcohol is customary eating meals, celebrating impotant events and in social gatherings. It is a habit that has led to banning alcohol consumption. This could make it considered a risk factor for alcohol consumption and dependence. The main objectivo of this work is to find out if satandardization exists, if it is a risk factor and if young people are following the customs we have already assimilated as part of our culture, if their consumption habits are changing and if they also believe it normal. For this, several articles and publications related to this subject have been searched and analyzed , that have helped us clarify this subject and to better understand the consumption habits of the Spanish and what conception do they have of the substance