Social capital, trust, and firm performance: the value of corporate social responsibility during the financial crisis

During the 2008-2009 financial crisis, firms with high social capital, measured as corporate social responsibility (CSR) intensity, had stock returns that were four to seven percentage points higher than firms with low social capital. High-CSR firms also experienced higher profitability, growth, and sales per employee relative to low-CSR firms, and they raised more debt. This evidence suggests that the trust between the firm and both its stakeholders and investors, built through investments in social capital, pays off when the overall level of trust in corporations and markets suffers a negative shock

The Bond Market Benefits of Corporate Social Capital

We investigate whether a firm’s social capital, and the trust that it engenders, are viewed favorably by bondholders. Using firms’ corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities to proxy for social capital, we find no relation between CSR and bond spreads over the period 2005-2013. However, during the 2008-2009 financial crisis, which represents a shock to trust and default risk, high-CSR firms benefited from lower bond spreads. These effects are stronger for firms with higher expected agency costs of debt. During the crisis, high-CSR firms were also able to raise more debt at lower spreads, better credit ratings, and longer maturities

The role of social capital in corporations: a review

This article reviews the literature on the role of social capital in the economy, with a particular emphasis on its importance for corporations. We relate social capital to concepts such as trust and corporate culture, and discuss and propose various metrics that capture social capital at the firm level, including firms’ corporate social responsibility (CSR) efforts. We summarize the extant research on the relation between social capital and both firm value and stock market performance. Finally, we analyse whether firms are investing enough in social capital. Throughout our discussion, we propose several avenues for further research

Trust, social capital, and the bond market benefits of ESG performance

We investigate whether a firm’s social capital and the trust that it engenders are viewed favorably by bondholders. Using firms’ environmental and social (E&S) performance to proxy for social capital, we find no relation between social capital and bond spreads over the period 2006–2019. However, during the 2008–2009 financial crisis, which represents a shock to trust and default risk, high-social-capital firms benefited from lower bond spreads. These effects are stronger for firms with higher expected agency costs of debt and firms whose E&S efforts are more salient. During the crisis, high-social-capital firms were also able to raise more debt, at lower spreads, and for longer maturities. We find no evidence that the governance element of ESG is related to bond spreads. The gap between E&S performance of firms in the bottom and top E&S terciles has narrowed since the financial crisis, especially in the year prior to accessing the bond market

The Cost of Diversity: The Diversification Discount and Inefficient Investment

In a simple model of capital budgeting in a diversified firm where headquarters has limited power, we show that funds are allocated towards the most inefficient divisions. The distortion is greater the more diverse are the investment opportunities of the firm's divisions. We test these implications on a panel of diversified firms in the U.S. during the period 1979-1993. We find that i) diversified firms mis-allocate investment funds; ii) the extent of mis-allocation is positively related to the diversity of the investment opportunities across divisions; iii) the discount at which these diversified firms trade is positively related to the extent of the investment mis-allocation and to the diversity of the investment opportunities across divisions.

Tobin's Q and the Gains from Takeovers.

This paper analyzes the relation between takeover gains and the q rations of targets and bidders for a sample of 704 mergers and tender offers over the period 1972-87. Target, bidder, and total returns are larger when targets have low q ratios and bidders have high q ratios. The relation is strengthened after controlling for the characteristics of the offer and the contest. This evidence confirms the results of the work by L. Lang, R. Stulz, and R. A. Walkling (1989) and shows that their findings also hold for mergers and after controlling for other determinants of takeover gains. Copyright 1991 by American Finance Association.