Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Political Activities in China

Applicant information
ZHANG, Jianjun Ph.D. Associate Professor of Organization and Management Guanghua School of Management, Peking University Adjunct Professor of School of Government, PKU Deputy Director, Case Research Center, PKU Beijing, 100871, P. R. China Tel: 86-10-62757333 Email: jjzhang@gsm.pku.edu.cn

Project Overview
We plan to study the relationship between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate political activities (CPA) in China. In the current literature, scholars either focus on CSR or CPA. This project seeks to integrate the two, since, in practice, CSR and CPA often address both societal and political concerns at the same time, as our current research on company donation after Sichuan earthquake suggests. By examining the CSR-CPA link, the key purpose of this project is to understand organizational strategic choices in the CSR/CPA arena and their parameters, such as what kind of choices corporations actually have in the CSR and CPA domains, what choices are finally selected and implemented, and how these choices are shaped by institutional constraints, stakeholder expectation/pressure, industry structure, and firm/executive characteristics. This project can contribute to our understanding of the relationship between CSR and CPA in China in particular, and to our understanding of the interaction between organizations and their broader institutional and economic environment in general. Furthermore, we attempt to disclose the unique characteristics of firm strategic choices and Chinese management through our effort. The combination of vivid qualitative evidence and generalizable quantitative evidence will provide implications to practitioners as well.

Project Background
This project was inspired by our current research on corporate donations after the Sichuan earthquake that occurred on May 12, 2008. During Chinas market transition, Chinese firms, as well as some multinational corporations (MNCs), have been found to engage in socially irresponsible behaviors such as poor product quality, exploitation of labor and the environment, fraudulence, tax evasion, and corruption (Beamish and Bapuji 2008; Snell and Tseng 2003; Tan 2009). These problems in turn have generated tension and resistance from the society, a process similar to what has been described by Karl Polanyi (1944). The Sichuan earthquake thus triggered hot debate in the mass media and internet about what roles companies should play in disaster relief in particular, and what social responsibilities companies should take in general. Many firms responded by donating to such an extent that some have claimed that the year of 2008 marked the first year of CSR awareness in China (Liu 2008).
1

After Sichuan earthquake, increasing attention has been paid to CSR, both among practitioners and scholars. For practitioners, CSR strategy and CSR management become urgent tasks. For example, what social responsibilities a firm should take and what should be the priorities (e.g., product quality, labor protection, philanthropy, environment protection, community involvement, etc.)? How should a firm manage its CSR practices? How should a firm manage conflicting stakeholder claims? Such practical concerns need management scholars to provide appropriate guidance. For scholars, there appeared unprecedented enthusiasm on CSR research. Research questions range from implementation of various CSR practices, determinants of CSR implementation, the relationship between CSR and financial performance, and whether CSR has been institutionalized among Chinese firms (AOM annual conference, August 2010, Canada. Session # 458 and #1687: CSR in China). Our research on corporate donations after the Sichuan earthquake finds that public opinion through the internet has become the main driving force for firms to respond. After the earthquake, internet users launched active discussion about corporate donation, publicizing donation information and composing rankings of stingy companies. The public media such as newspapers and TV also spread information about corporate donation, reflecting public opinion for corporate involvement in disaster relief. We find that companies that were more concerned with their public image and companies that were more closely attached to the government were more likely to donate. More concretely, companies whose top executives are (or had been) delegates to Peoples Congress (PC) or Chinese Peoples Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), called red capitalists by Dickson (2003), were more likely to donate and also donated a larger amount. This suggests that both the general public and government were audiences that need to be satisfied when companies donated. In other words, donation served as a marketing tool to get goodwill from customers/general public as well as political strategy to get approval from government. This finding spurred our strong interest in studying the relationship between CSR and corporate political activities (CPA). This interest in the CSR-CPA link is also based on my previous research on CPA in China (Zhang and Zhang 2005; Zhang 2008a, 2008b; Zhang and Lin, 2010). As is well known, CPA is particularly important in emerging economies due to weak market institutions (Hoskisson, Eden, Lau, & Wright, 2000; Wright, Filatotchev, Hoskisson, & Peng, 2005), especially in China. First, the Chinese government controls a wide variety of resources and accesses, making business-government relations critical for business survival and success. Second, poor legal infrastructure, frequent change of government policies and high degree of official discretion further increase the uncertainty and thus the importance of business-government relations. Under such conditions, businesses actively engaged in various political activities, ranged from informal personal connections to formal political participation, lobbying, and so on (Kennedy 2005; Li and Zhang 2007; Xin and Pearce 1996; Zhang and Zhang 2005). However, with the progress of Chinas market transition, the increasing awareness of customers/workers/community residents and the general public, the rapid growth of internet, and gradual legitimization of NGOs, firms have to respond to social expectation and social initiatives, as donation after the Sichuan earthquake indicates. Thus, how to satisfy both the general public and government, that is, how to choose between or combine CSR and CPA, become a practical concern for businesses. Such a concern is highlighted by the recent Shengyuan Milk crisis. Shengyuan Milk was accused of having high levels of hormones which caused abnormally early sexual
2

development in girls. This dramatically affected the image of the brand. The company on the one hand actively provided information to government authorities to defend. On the other hand, the company raised 10 million RMB to set up a fund to help those children even though it was finally proved innocent. There are additional reasons why it is important to explore the CSR-CPA link in China. First, the social responsibilities firms take are conventionally the intrinsic duty of the government. China has long featured a strongly paternalistic government, and Chinese firms consider social responsibilities to be the realm of the government (Zhao and Zhang 2007). So when a firm takes social responsibility, it actually shoulders/shares the burden of the government. Second, CSR becomes important and is endowed political component when the Chinese government called for building a harmonious society in recent years. Corporations are encouraged to play critical roles in maintaining societal harmony. Third, some initiatives that push corporations to engage in social responsibility actually come from the government. For example, at the beginning of 2008, the State-owned Asset Supervision and Administration Commission (SASAC) issued a guideline to promote its supervised enterprises to take social responsibility. In the same year, Shanghai Stock Exchange required that certain listed companies must issue CSR report. Marquis, Qian and Nis (2010) recent study confirms that institutionalization of CSR (philanthropy) activities in Chinese public firms is more politically motivated.

Research Questions
Our key research question is: what is the relationship between CSR and CPA in China? Concretely: 1. What kinds of CSR and CPA do corporations engage in? 2. How do corporations with different institutional makeup differ in CSR and CPA? 3. What is the relationship between CSR and CPA in China? Are they separate issues or related issues when companies make decisions? If they are related, are they functionally a complement or a substitute? Or are they connected in other ways? 4. In what domains/issues, will companies mainly respond to societal call by CSR, in what domains/issues will companies choose CPA, in what domains they do both? 5. What institutional, industrial, firm, and executive characteristics lead corporations to choose between CSR and CPA? 6. What can we say about the interaction between organizations and environment through this project? We are aware that both the fields of CSR and CPA have attracted significant prior research (for example, for CSR, see Margolis and Walsh 2003; Orlitzky, Schmidt, and Rynes 2003; Walsh, Weber, and Margolis 2003, for review. For CPA, see Hillman, Keim and Schuler 2004; Shaffer 1995, for review). However, this project does not aim at understanding each field alone, but instead focuses on the relationship between the two types of activities. As our research on company donation after the Sichuan earthquake suggests, there are reasons to think they may be linked as CSR and CPA frequently address both societal and political concerns at the same time. Yet, there has not yet been research to integrate the two fields. Besides integrating CSR and CPA, this project also tries to fill some additional research gaps. Much academic research on CSR and CPA has been devoted to
3

ascertaining the relationship between CSR/CPA and corporate financial performance (see Orlitzky, et al., 2003, for a meta-analysis; Hillman et al. 2004). Insufficient attention has been paid to understand organizational strategic choices and their parameters in CSR/CPA arena, such as what choices corporations actually have in the CSR and CPA domains, what choices are finally picked and implemented, and how these choices are shaped by institutional constraints, industrial structure, stakeholder expectation/pressure, and firm/executive characteristics. In brief, this project focuses on the strategic choices of firms in CSR and CPA and the antecedents of their choices. Answering these questions need deep understanding of institutional characteristics in China, close observation of corporate practices, and utilizing various methods to do a rigid research.

Literature Review and Hypotheses

There are basically two streams of theoretical accounts/research traditions to explain the motivation of CSR and CPA: the strategic approach and the institutional approach. The strategic approach assumes that firms are primarily profit-driven and can strategically decide what they should do. Scholars who embrace strategic approach maintain that firms should engage in CSR and CPA strategically to reach their goals (Rick and Williams 2005; Mackey, Mackey, and Barney 2007) and to tame their political environment (Neiheisel 1994; Sanchez 2000). For instance, Porter and Krammer (2007) explicitly advise firms not to engage in social initiatives blindly, but to choose carefully those social initiatives that can enhance their competitive advantages. Similarly, corporations should decide strategically whether to engage in political behavior and what political activities can serve their purpose best. This is why much of the CSR and CPA literature has been devoted to ascertaining the relationship between CSR/CPA and corporate financial performance (see Orlitzky, et al., 2003, for a meta-analysis; Hillman et al. 2004). Regarding how CSR and CPA can contribute to a firms immediate strategic objectives and in turn its profitability, this literature has suggested two major ways: CSR/CPA as a marketing/political tool (to get resources) and CSR/CPA as a means to enhance and maintain corporate reputation/status (Varadarajan and Menon, 1988; Clelland, 2004; McWilliams and Siegel, 2001). On the other hand, the institutional approach focuses on the constraints and contingencies that the external environment puts on organizations. Institutional theory (Meyer and Rowan 1977; DiMaggio and Powell 1983) and network approaches (Granovetter 1985) view firms as embedded in, constrained and enabled by their social environments. Scholars in this camp emphasize that firms engage in CSR to comply with institutions, to satisfy important stakeholders other than shareholders, to fit the firms and the top executives conceptions of their identities, and to win acceptance by the managerial elite circles (Campbell 2007; Galaskiewicz and Wasserman 1989; Galaskiewicz 1991, 1997; Margolis and Walsh 2003; Marquis, Glynn and Davis, 2007; Weaver, Trevino, and Cochran 1999). In the similar vein, Hillman and Keim (1995) argue that corporate political activities are actually a function of the formal and informal institutions of a country. If efficiency and profit are the key purpose of CSR and CPA for strategic approach, then legitimacy is the key purpose for institutional concern. If strategic approach focuses on the discretion and autonomy of firms, then institutional approach emphasizes the constraints and impact of external environment. While some theoretical works have suggested that both strategic and institutional concerns might coexist (Aguilera et al. 2007), little empirical research has been done
4

to examine whether and how the strategic and institutional factors can both play a role in shaping CSR and CPA. This study tries to integrate the two. On the one hand, we believe that institutions originate from political and social environment put constraints on organizations, thus determine or shape the choices that organizations can make. Institutions mark the boundary of choice set for organizations. On the other hand, we also argue that organizations have discretion and can make strategic choices to improve their competitive advantage. Even in the same environment, organizations respond differently, which reflects their strategic choice. Particularly, in this project, we argue that organizations might choose between CSR and CPA (or both) to satisfy the expectation of the external environment. The interaction between business and society/politics leads to the evolution of both the environment and organizations. That is to say, organizations and environment coevolve (Krug & Hendrischke 2008). Besides providing theoretical insights about CSR/CPA motivation, the strategic and institutional approach actually guide us to look for certain factors that might influence CSR/CPA. The institutional approach points out the importance of external constraints or contingencies, while strategic approach puts more focus on firm and top executive characteristics. As a matter of fact, the antecedents of CSR and CPA identified by the existing literature all fall into these categories. For example, Hillman et al. (2004) classify the antecedents of CPA into four categories: institutional, issue, industry and firm level. Institutional antecedents include political system, class/elite networking, etc. Issue-specific antecedents include issue salience, issue competition, political competition or counter-mobilization by anti-business groups. Industry antecedents include industry structure (e.g., concentration and number of firms), political activity of industry competitors. Firm level factors include firm size, firm dependence on government, firm slack, firm age, firm diversification level, foreign ownership, formalized firm structure, and managerial influence. Similarly, research on CSR also indicates the impact of institutional, firm and executive characteristics, though a large amount of CSR research focuses on the social-financial performance link. For example, based on existing literature and logic, Campbell (2007) spells out institutional conditions under which corporations are likely to behave in socially responsible ways. Such institutional conditions include public and private regulation, the presence of NGOs and other independent organizations, institutionalized norms regarding appropriate corporate behavior, associative/networking behavior among corporations themselves, and organized dialogues among corporations and their stakeholders. As for firm level factors, McWilliams and Siegel (2001) hypothesize that a firm's level of CSR will depend on its size, level of diversification, research and development, advertising, government sales, consumer income, labor market conditions, and stage in the industry life cycle. Empirical studies also demonstrate the impact of top executives upon CSR. Weaver, Trevino, and Cochran (1999) found that management commitment to ethnics explain the development of more integrated ethics program practices, contrasting with decoupled ethics program implementation. The influence of top executives on social performance is also confirmed by other studies (Greening & Gray 1994; Miles 1987). In summary, institutional, industry, firm and executive characteristics determine the choice and implementation of both CSR and CPA. These factors will be included in this study after incorporating Chinese characteristics. As aforementioned, the foremost important characteristic of China context is market transition. Hence, the degree of market development/competition becomes the critical factor that affects CSR and CPA. Based on a survey of general managers of hotels in China, Qu (2007) found that market orientation is the most significant predicator of CSR followed by
5

government regulations. Liu and Anbums study (2009) on the environmental information disclosure (EID) of public listed firms finds that the corporate EID effort is significantly related to its environmental sensitivity (a proxy of the pressure from the government) and its size. Companies operating in eastern coastal regions are more likely to disclose emission-related data. Their study also finds that the better the companys economic performance, the more information on environmental investment and pollution control cost is disclosed. Based on the above literature, we tentatively raise the following hypotheses: CSR-CPA link: As aforementioned, the government still plays important roles in resource allocation and regulation during Chinas transition, which creates the dependence of business upon government. Meanwhile, the government is also the most important initiator of CSR and audience of CSR. Firms engage in CSR can not only satisfy the general public/potential customers, but at the same time can please the government. Therefore, firms CSR practices and record can help them get recognition and approval from the government, which in turn help them get political status. Such political status is partly reflected by the top executives political positions (e.g., PC or CPPCC delegates), which can be considered as a political reward. Of course, political participation and political status is driven more by business executives strategic concerns. On the other hand, top executives political status will raise a higher expectation from the government and the general public that they should shoulder more social responsibilities to match their status, like what we found in post-earthquake donations. Hence: H1a: CSR and CPA reinforce each other. CSR might bring firms more political recognition and status (CPA), while political status will create pressure for more CSR. However, possible alternative combination also exists. With the progress of Chinas market transition, firms get resources and competitive advantage more from the market instead of the government (Nee 1989; Peng 2003). Using the vocabulary of sociologists, market transition to some extent means the separation of economy and society from politics. Consequently, firms have to seek support from customers/the general public. The rise of internet further amplifies the importance of firm public image. To increase or maintain the public image of a firm, CSR becomes more important. In contrast, CPA becomes less important with the market transition. Hence: H1b: The higher the degree of market development, the higher the degree of CSRCPA decoupling. Institutions and CSR-CPA choice: To further examine the CSR-CPA link, we will investigate the influence of institutional characteristics upon CSR-CPA choices. Institutions provide the parameters in which organizations act. They set boundaries and define what is appropriate. The main institutional characteristic during Chinas transition is the hybrid of the market and the government and the shifting importance of each across regions/industries/ownerships. We argue that the development of market will create conditions for firms to engage more in CSR, while government intervention/regulation is positively related to CPA. Simply, resource dependence differs under different institutional arrangement. Firms have to cater to customers to
6

get resources when the market allocates resources, while they have to please government when government intervention/regulation is important. In China, the unique institutional makeup can be captured by three proxies: region, industry and ownership. These three proxies embody different mixture of the market and the government. Due to the wide variations in the level of economic development and the stage of market reform, institutions differ dramatically across regions (Brandt & Li 2003). A sharp distinction exists between the coastal and interior areas. Firms in coastal areas experienced market reform early and more completely, and were exposed more to the outside world and Western culture. They are thus more prone to market oriented competition and to accept CSR. Similarly, institutions also vary across industries due to the different degree of government (de)regulation. Simply, firms in monopolized industries face different realities compared to firms in competitive industries. Firms in competitive industries must satisfy the need of customers, generating the need for CSR; whilst firms in monopolized industries must put priority on satisfying the government. As for ownership, SOEs and private enterprises have different institutional constraints to engage in CSR/CPA. Relative to SOEs, private firms will focus more on CSR because of their market orientation and vulnerability of legitimacy. Therefore: H2: The higher the influence of the market, the greater the importance of CSR relative to CPA. H2a: Firms in coastal areas will focus more on CSR relative to CPA. H2b: Firms in competitive industries will focus more on CSR relative to CPA. H2c: Private firms will focus more on CSR compared to SOEs. Ownership and CSR Differences: Besides its impact on CSR-CPA link as H2c suggests, ownership might also influence CSR choices. In this study, we select three most salient CSR issues in China: labor protection, environment protection, and philanthropy. Considering historical legacy, government regulation, and market orientation, SOEs and private firms are likely to fare differently in the three arenas. First, the socialist legacy in SOEs equips workers stronger bargaining power and oblige firms more duty in labor protection and providing various welfare benefits. After the central government called for building a harmonious society, SOEs have to follow the call. To maintain social stability, those workers who were forced to step down from their positions (xiagang) in early years were allowed to go back to work in some SOEs. Employees in SOEs continuously enjoy higher standard of labor protection and improvement in welfare. Some executives express such situation by saying that SOEs are characterized by the maximization of employee interest (interview). In contrast, private firms are typified as maximization of the interest of owners/shareholders. Second, environment protection in China today is mainly driven by government regulation. As a result, organizations that are more closely monitored by the government are more likely to follow the regulation. Apparently, SOEs are more closely monitored by government. Third, philanthropy today to some extent serves as a marketing tool in China, thus firms that are more market oriented will be more likely to engage in philanthropy. Private firms are more often market oriented and therefore more likely to use philanthropy as a marketing tool. A case in point is Wanglaoji, a soft drink brand that benefited dramatically by donating 100 million RMB after the Sichuan earthquake. By contrast, besides their less market orientation, SOEs also face a dilemma when making donations: some will praise their generosity, while others
7

would accuse them for agency problems. That is, donations made by SOEs might be considered as a means through which SOE managers win public applause at the cost of the state interest.1 Therefore: H3: SOEs are likely to have greater labor protection and environmental protection in comparison to private firms, while private firms are more likely to engage in philanthropy than SOEs. Firm Characteristics: Literature shows that many factors at the firm level might influence CSR and CPA such as firm size, age, R&D, diversification, etc. Besides examining the impact of these variables (as controls), we focus on firm market orientation. During Chinas market transition, whether a firm decides to compete based on market advantages or compete based on government relations is somewhat determined by the strategic orientation of firms (besides industry factors). Qus finding (2007) that market orientation is the most significant predicator of CSR provides empirical evidence of this. In contrast, those firms that emphasizes more on business-government relations might engage more on CPA. While H2 emphasizes more on structural factors and might be more deterministic in nature, here we mainly examine firms own strategic orientation. For example, marketing expenses (e.g., advertisement) might reflect a firms own choice and indicate its degree of market orientation. Of course, we will develop a series of measurement to gauge a firms market orientation. H4. Firm market orientation is positively related to CSR rather than CPA. Executive Characteristics Executive characteristics are particularly important in the Chinese context, especially for private firms, due to the low degree of institutionalization within Chinese firms (Zhang and Ma 2009). We examine the impact of executives mainly from two factors: their human capital and social/political capital. Their human capital includes their demographic features such as education, western education, and functional background; while their social/political capital includes political attachment and past government working experience (Li and Zhang, forthcoming). As the upper echelon perspective (Hambrick and Mason 1984) suggests, such factors might affect top executives mentality and decision-making. Since the idea and practice of CSR comes from the West, executives with Western experiences will be more likely to embrace CSR relative to CPA. Meanwhile, CSR serves as marketing tool for firms as argued. Thus, executives who have marketing background might be more sensitive to external expectation. As for political connections of executives, we have enough evidence and reasoning that they have positive impact upon CSR (Luo and Zhang 2009). Hence: H5: Executives with higher education, western experience, and marketing background are more likely to engage in CSR relative to CPA, while executives with political attachment are more likely to participate in CSR too.

Research Design
1

Wang, H. 2010. Officials in SASAC denied that SOE donations come from profits that should be submitted to government. China Economic Weekly, Cited from http://news.sina.com.cn/c/sd/2010-09-28/002721181809.shtml 8

Data Collection Method This project combines qualitative and quantitative methodologies. We will use interviews, develop case studies, collect archival data, and conduct survey research. Interviews and case study development can help us understand more deeply the organizational decision-making process and business practices underlying the CSR-CPA link. The chief investigator of this project teaches a large body of executives each year and also serves as the deputy director of Case Research Center, Peking University, which provides access to business executives. Interviewees will be chosen based on the location (coastal versus interior), industry, and ownership of firms. A basic conceptual framework can then be constructed. Meanwhile, archival data will also be collected from relevant firms. There exists voluminous information about CSR and CPA in databases, news report, and company websites. We have accumulated valuable experience in collecting archival data when we do our research on company donations. If necessary, commercial service from data mining companies can be used. Then survey research focused on the purpose of this project will be conducted. Based on interview/case and archival research, measurement instrument will be developed and the survey will be implemented. Our initial belief is that focusing our survey research on small-medium enterprises (SMEs) will add the greatest value to the project and our understanding since there is little available archival data about them. Of course, a well-design survey is the best means to get comprehensive and accurate understanding of what is really going on in CSR-CPA link. Sampling Built on our current research on company donations, we will collect data on three samples. One is public listed firms in China, which includes 300 largest SOEs in origin (and state is still the largest shareholder) and 300 largest private firms in origin. The second sample includes 500 largest foreign invested enterprises (FIEs) in China. For these two samples, we will collect further information on CSR and CPA, while at the same time share the previous information. The third sample includes mainly SMEs. This could be either a convenience sample based on the chief investigator s executive students or a random sample. Measurement . For both CSR and CPA there exist a variety of practices so we have considered measurement issues extensively. For example, CSR ranges from labor protection, product quality, environment protection, philanthropy, community service, so on and so forth. For CPA, there exist formal and informal political activities. Among formal CPA, there are various means such as political participation, political linkage, information and lobbying, etc. (Zhang 2008b). Based on our previous study and our understanding of business practices, this study will focus on labor protection, environment protection, and philanthropy as the three main arenas of CSR. In each arena, we will develop measurement from interview/case studies and archival data (e.g., CSR annual report and website presentation of companies). For CPA, building on previous studies (Zhang 2008b; Tian et al. 2003; He and Tian 2008), we will focus on formal political activities for large public listed firms and 500 largest FIEs, such as political participation, political linkage, information and lobbying, commitment to Chinas economic development and technology progress (for FIEs), etc. For the survey on SMEs, we will measure both formal and informal (such as guanxi) political activities.
9

Analytical technique Considering the nature of research methods and data structure, both qualitative and quantitative analytical techniques will be utilized. For interview and case studies, we will use inductive logic to generate hypotheses on CSR-CPA link. Then we will use quantitative data to test and generalize such hypotheses.

Research Foundations
We have already built good foundation for this project: 1. Our current study on company donations after Sichuan earthquake provides clues and insights to CSR-CPA link. 2. Our current research on CSR reporting also involves the political factors that affect CSR reporting. 3. The chief investigator of this project has done studies on CPA on private firms in China and has several publications (Zhang 2005; 2008a, 2008b; 2010). 4. The chief investigator has accumulated about 30 business cases on CSR-CPA of FIEs in China. 5. The chief investigator teaches a large body of executives each year, making it possible to do survey and case studies.

Outcomes and Contributions

This project can have 3-4 publications either in English or Chinese. At least one paper will be published based on each sample. Besides academic publications, we will also develop papers for journals whose audiences are mainly practitioners such as Harvard Business Review, California Management Review, etc. This study makes both theoretical and practical contributions. Theoretically, it contributes to the literature in the three ways. First, it explores the relationship between CSR and CPA, which has not been studied in the current literature. Second, it focuses on organizational strategic choices and their parameters, such as what choices corporations have in the CSR and CPA domains, and how these choices are shaped by institutional constraints, industrial structure, and firm/executive characteristics. Third, this study can make a general argument on the interaction between organizations and their external environments. Practically, this study tries to give guidance to business practitioners about what they should do to get competitive advantage, and how decision should be made. Collaborators This project has two collaborators: Xiaowei Luo and Christopher Marquis. Xiaowei Luo is an associate professor at INSEAD. She has published articles in ASQ, Organization Science, JIBS, JMS, etc. Christopher Marquis is an associate professor at Harvard Business School. He has published articles in ASQ, AMJ, AMR, and other top journals. He is particularly interested in environment issues in recent years, and has conducted research on CSR in China. Chris also teaches a course on CSR for MBA students at HBS. We have been collaborating on the project of company donations after Sichuan earthquake and other related projects, through which we have built mutual trust and compatible working style. We are confident that our collaboration will produce high quality English publications. See their curriculum vitae for their research interests and publication records.

10

Schedules
The tentative schedule follows: 1. Case studies, interview and archival data collection: Jan. 2011June 2011. 2. Survey: July 2011Dec. 2011. 3. Data analysis and paper writing: 2012. 4. Presentation of results: AOM 2012, 2013 and other conferences. Papers will be submitted to academic journals from 2012.

Budget
Item Data collection (questionnaire printing, gifts, etc.) Travelling expenses (including interview) Data mining and analysis Attending conference International Collaboration RA stipend Books, materials Other Total Suggested Amount 80,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 30,000 32,500 10,000 7,500 250,000

Pledge
I and my collaborators promise to adhere to ethical standards for scientific research. On the one hand, we will not harm any involved human subjects (informants) in any means. On the other hand, we pledge to abide by the principles of intellectual property rights. All our research ideas and publications will be original. Meanwhile, we make commitment to finish the research project on time once supported.

References
Aguilera, R., D. Rupp, Williams, & Ganapathi, J. 2007. Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: A multilevel theory of social change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32: 836863. Baysinger, B., G. Keim, & Zeithaml, C. 1985. An empirical evaluation of the potential for including shareholder in corporate constituency programs. Academy of Management Journal 28: 180-200. Beamish, P., & Bapuji, H. 2008. Toy recalls and China: Emotion vs. evidence. Management and Organ. Rev. 4(2) 197-209. Brandt, L., & Li, H. 2003. Bank discriminations in transition economies: Ideology, information or incentives? Journal of Comparative Economics, 31: 387-413. Campbell, J. L. 2007. Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Acad. Management Rev. 32 946967. Dickson, B. 2003. Red Capitalists in China: the Party, Private Entrepreneurs, and Prospects for Political Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DiMaggio, P. J., and Powell, W. W. 1983. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organization fields. American Sociological Review, 48: 147-160. Friedman, M. 1970. The social responsibility of business is to increase profits. New York Times Magazine, September 13: 32-33, 122, 124, 126. Galaskiewicz, J. 1997. An urban grants economy revisited: Corporate charitable contributions in
11

the Twin Cities, 1979-81, 1987-89. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42: 445-471. Galaskiewicz, J., & Wasserman, S. 1989. Mimetic processes within an interorganizational field: An empirical test. Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 34(3): 454-479. Granovetter, M. 1985. Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology 91 (November): 481-510. Greening, D. W., & Gray, B. 1994. Testing a model of organizational response to social and political issues. Academy of Management Journal, 37: 467-498. Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. 1984. Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its managers. Academy Management Review, 9: 193-206. He, Y., & Tian, Z., 2008. Government-oriented corporate public relation strategies in transitional China. Management Organization Review, 4(3): 367-391. Hillman, A. & Keim, G. 1995. International variation in the business-government interface: Institutional and organizational consideration. Academy of Management Review, 20: 193-214. Hillman, A., Keim, G. & Schuler, D. 2004). Corporate political activity: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 30(6): 837-857. Hoskisson, R., Eden, L., Lau, C., and Wright, M. 2000. Strategy in emerging economies. Academy of Management Journal, 43: 249267. Jensen, M. 2002. Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12: 235-256. Keim, G., & Zeithaml, C. 1986. Corporate political strategies and legislative decision making: A review and contingency approach. Academy of Management Review, 11: 828-843. Kennedy, S. 2005. The business of lobbying in China. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Krug, B., & Hendrischke, H. 2008. Framing China: Transformation and institutional change through co-evolution. Management and Organization Review, 4(1): 81-108. Lautz, T. 2010. China's deficit in American studies. http://chronicle.com/article/Chinas-Deficit-in-American/123884/ Li, H. Y., & Zhang, Y. 2007. The role of managers political networking and functional experience in new venture performance: Evidence from Chinas transition economy. Strategic Management Journal, 28: 791-804. Li, Q., & Zhang, J.J. Institutional antecedents and top managers characteristics: An empirical study. Management World, forthcoming. Liu, C. 2008. Survey suggests that Sichuan earthquake awakens Chinese firms sense of corporate social responsibility. http://www.chinanews.com.cn/cj/gncj/news/2008/07-19/1317938.shtml. Liu, X., & Anbum, V. 2009. Determinant factors of corporate environmental information disclosure: an empirical study of Chinese listed companies. Journal of Clearer Production, 17:593-600. Luo, X., & Zhang, J.J. 2009. Institutional or instrumental: what affects corporate social responsibility behavior in emerging economies. Academy of Management Proceedings: 1-6. McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. 2001. Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26: 117-127. Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J.P. 2003. Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Admin. Sci. Quart. 48: 268-305. Marquis, C., Glynn, M. A., & Davis, G. 2007. Community isomorphism and corporate social action. Academy of Management Review 32(3): 925-945.

12

Marquis, C., Qian, C., & Ni, N. 2010. Institutional transition and Chinese firms corporate social responsibility following the Sichuan earthquake. Academy of Management Meeting. Matten, D., & Moon, J. 2008. Implicit and explicit CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of cooperate social responsibility. Acad. Management Rev. 33 404-424. Mackey, A., Mackey, T.B., & Barney, J.B. 2007. Corporate social responsibility and firm performance: Investor preferences and corporate strategies. Academy of Management Review, 32: 817-813. Meyer, J., & Rowan, B. 1977. Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83: 340-363. Miles, R. H. 1987. Managing the corporate social environment: A grounded theory. Englewood Gliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Nee, V. 1989. A theory of market transition: from redistribution to markets in state socialism. American Sociological Review, 54 (5): 663-81. Neiheisel, S. R. 1994. Corporate Strategy and the Politics of Goodwill: A Political Analysis of Corporate Philanthropy in America. New York: Peter Lang Publishing. Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L. , & Rynes, S.L. 2003. Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organ. Stud. 24: 403441. Peng, M. 2003. Institutional transitions and strategic choices. Academy of Management Review, 28(2): 275-296. Polanyi, K. 1944. The great transformation. Boston: Beacon Press. Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. 2007. Strategy and society: The Link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 85: 78-92. Qu, R. 2007. Corporate social responsibility in China: Impact of regulations, market orientation and ownership structure. Chinese Management Studies, 1(3): 198-207. S nchez, C.M.. 2000. Motives for corporate philanthropy in El Salvador: Altruism and political legitimacy. Journal of Business Ethics, 27: 363-375. Shaffer, B. 1995. Firm-level responses to government regulation. Journal of Management, 21(3): 495-514. Ricks, J.M. Jr., & Williams, J.A. 2005. Strategic corporate philanthropy: Addressing frontline talent needs through an educational giving program. Journal of Business Ethics, 60: 147-157. Sethi, P. 1982. Corporate political activism. California Management Review, 24(2): 32-42. Snell, R.S., & Tseng, C.S. 2003. Images of the virtuous employee in Chinas transitional economy. Asia Pacific J. Management, 20(3) 307-331. Tan, J. 2009. Institutional structure and firm social performance in transitional economies: Evidence of multinational corporations in China. J. Bus. Ethics, 86: 171-189. Tian, Z., Gao, Y., & Wei, W. 2003. A study of political strategy and behavior of Chinese Firms, Management World, Vol.12. Walsh, J. P., Weber, K. & Margolis, J.D. 2003. Social issues and management: Our lost cause found. Journal of Management, 29: 859-881., Weaver, G. R., Trevino, L. K., & Cochran, P.L. 1999. Integrated and decoupled corporate social performance: Management commitment, external pressures, and corporate ethics practices. Academy of Management Journal, 42: 539-552. Williamson, O. E. 1985. The economic institutions of capitalism. New York: Free Press.

13

Wright, M., Filatotchev, I., Hoskisson, R., & Peng, M. W. 2005. Strategy research in emerging economies: Challenging conventional wisdom. Journal of Management Studies, 42: 133. Varadarajan, P.R., & Menon, A. 1988. Cause-related marketing: A coalignment of marketing strategy and corporate philanthropy. Journal of Marketing, 52: 58-74. Xin, K. R., and Pearce, J. L. 1996. Guanxi: Connections as substitutes for formal institutional support. Academy of Management Journal, 39 (6): 1641-1658. Zhang, J,J., & Zhang, Z.X. 2005. Political strategies of Chinese private firms. Management World, No. 7: 94-105. Zhang, J.J. 2008a. Liability of middleness: Size, age and business-government networking in China. International Association for Chinese Management Research, Guangzhou, China, June 2008. Zhang, J.J. 2008b. Political activities of private firms. Economic Observer. Dec. 8, 2008. Zhang, J,J., & Lin, S. 2010. Business-government relations. In Zhang & Zhang (eds.) Multiple Understanding of Chinese Firms: pp 43-69. Beijing: Peking University Press. Zhang, J.J., & Ma, H. 2009. Adoption of professional management in Chinese family business: A multilevel analysis of impetuses and impediments. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 26(1): 119-139 Zhao, Q., Zhang, Y. 2007. A comparative study on the philanthropy by international corporations and Chinese enterprises. Society 27 144-161.

14