Running head: ENGAGING IN CSR

What motivates firms to engage in CSR practices? An exploratory study using qualitative and
quantitative methods.
J.R. Reagan

Running head: ENGAGING IN CSR

Introduction
As a leader in Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), Starbucks has been granted dozens
of awards and honors since the mid-1990s, a full list of which is proudly displayed on its website
(Starbucks, 2004). On this site we also encounter numerous links to pages designed to
demonstrate its commitment to CSR. From these pages the four key aspects of its CSR program
can be discerned: charitable contributions ($8.3 million or 0.3 percent of its net revenue in 2002)
and positive actions and commitments in the areas of environmental responsibility and fair trade.
However, Starbucks also gives an economic reason for its actions. It states that more investors
and consumers today are demanding that companies be accountable for the environmental and
social impacts of their operations. There is a growing body of empirical studies demonstrating
the positive impact [Corporate Social Responsibility] has on business economic performance and
shareholder value (Starbucks, 2003:3)
The aim of this research is to explore what motivates firms to engage in social action.
The established view used to be that corporate social spending is akin to advertising (Burt,
1983: 419; Webb & Farmer, 1996). That is to say that firms are primarily motivated to engage in
social action because social spending boosts profitability. This view is based on the premise that,
all other things being equal, a corporation with a positive social reputation will attract more
consumers and better employees than a firm with a less positive social image (Creyer & Ross,
1997; Ellen, Mohr & Webb, 2000; Sen & Bhattacharya, 2001, Turban & Greening, 1997).
However, the validity of this view has been called into question by an exhaustive analysis of 127
studies over 30 years by Margolis and Walsh (2003). They found that there was no clear
consistent positive relationship between the social and the financial performance of corporations.

Running head: ENGAGING IN CSR

These findings imply that the influence of corporate social action on profitability is mixed and in
some cases absent or even negative. This study suggests therefore that economic reasons alone
are insufficient in explaining either the frequency with which firms practise CSR or the nature of
the social practices they choose to engage in. Compared to other topics in organizational theory,
little... attention has been paid to understanding why or why not corporations act in socially
responsible ways (Campbell, 2007:946). Given that the established wisdom regarded CSR has
been called into question, there is a need to address this gap in the literature.
Purpose of this Study
In spite of a number of recent articles on CSR, the issue remains relatively understudied
when compared to other questions explored in organizational theory literature (Brnn and
Vidaver-Cohen, 2009:92). This study aims to address this gap in the academic literature. It will
focus on the key research question: what are the primary motivations corporations engage in
activities that benefit society? The purpose of this study is to contribute to our understanding of
CSR by exploring and testing the explanatory value of institutional theory (Selznick, 1957),
stakeholder theory (Freeman, 1984) and the concept of social capital (Coleman 1988, Putnam,
1995) in this context. Using both qualitative and quantitative means, this study will test two
specific hypotheses about CSR, which will be outlined below.
Theoretical Lens
This research will approach the topic of CSR through the theoretical lens of institutional
theory, descriptive stakeholder theory and social capital. It will explore how robust corporate
values and social networks that connect firms with their wider social environments influence
corporate decision making regarding CSR, in a context of conflicting stakeholder interests.
Drawing on Freemans work (1984) this study will use a much broader definition of corporate

Running head: ENGAGING IN CSR

stakeholder than is used in the traditional view of the firm. In addition to shareholders, this study
will treat any person or social group that affects or can be affected by a corporation's actions as a
stakeholder. According to this broad definition, corporate stakeholders include employees,
suppliers, customers, government agencies, associated corporations, communities, political
groups and the public at large. Unlike normative stakeholder theory (Evan and Freeman, 1990)
which is prescriptive in nature, descriptive or analytic stakeholder theory (e.g. Freeman, 1984)
focuses on how managers and stakeholders actually behave and view their actions and roles. It
takes the corporation as a focal point of both cooperative and competing interests. This study
proposes that the actual behavior of different corporate stakeholders might be satisfactorily
explained by institutional theory and the concept of social capital.
Institutional theory, originated by Selznick (1948, 1949, 1957), focuses on the resilient
structure of routines, rules and norms that underlies the ways in which members of a social group
think and act. Unlike classical rational-actor models that explain group behavior as the sum of
the attributes or motives of its members, institutional theory enables analysts to include the
influence of group culture as an independent variable (Powell and DiMaggio 1991:8). This study
will approach its topic from an institutional theory angle because this framework enables
researchers to explore the cognitive and cultural factors that shape corporate motivation. It makes
it possible to explore and compare the ways in which different social structures, or institutions,
shape the motivations of managers, shareholders, and other key stakeholders. It allows
researchers to examine the influence of different boardroom routines, corporate cultures, industry
specific rules and different national contexts on the way corporations are governed.
Social capital (Coleman 1988, 1990, Putnam, 1993, 1995, 2000) is integral to the
structure of routines, rules, values and norms that underlie the ways in which members of social

Running head: ENGAGING IN CSR

groups operate. It is a social resource that is created through interaction between individuals
within social networks. It encompasses mutual understanding, trust and goodwill and facilitates
cooperation and coordination between network members. Consequently, social capital improves
a firms efficiency and facilitates access to resources such as funds and information. For this
reason, social capital is an important source of competitive advantage to corporations.
Scope of the Research
This research will combine two separate studies, one quantitative and one qualitative, in
order to explore what motivates corporations to engage in CSR initiatives. Both studies will be
based on an extensive literature review and an analysis of data from 100 US corporations from a
diverse range of industries. The qualitative study will examine transcripts from interviews
conducted with managers at the corporations under study using the perspective of institutional
theory and stakeholder theory, whereas the quantitative study will analyze measure the frequency
of difference between the levels of disclosure and corresponding CSR ratings for selected firms
between 2010 and 2011through a social capital theoretical lens. The former will focus
exclusively on the views of senior decision makers believed to be most informed about corporate
strategy, the latter on organizational views as publicly stated through independent ratings.
Contribution of the Study
The aim of this study is to address the current gap in the academic literature regarding
CSR. A better understanding of the factors that shape corporate motivation to engage in CSR
initiatives will help organizational theorists explain differences between firms in terms of the
frequency with which they engage in such activities, the approaches they take and the kind of
initiatives they support. On a practical level, the study will help various stakeholders develop
more effective strategies for involving corporations in social action.

Running head: ENGAGING IN CSR

Research Phase One Qualitative Study

Problem Statement
Recent studies (e.g. Margolis and Walsh, 2003) have shown that there is no clear
consistent positive relationship between the social and the financial performance of corporations.
This indicates that economic factors alone cannot sufficiently explain corporate motivations to
engage in Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) initiatives. To date, the primary reasons
companies engage in activities that benefit society remain unclear (Miller and Guthrie, 2007). In
spite of this, comparatively little research has so far been carried out on the topic of CSR in the
field of organizational theory. This study aims to address this gap in the literature by focusing on
the key research question: what are the primary reasons corporations engage in activities that
benefit society? This study will shed light on the differences between corporate CSR strategies
and enable researchers, managers and policy makers to more effectively explain, predict and
influence the involvement of corporations in social action.
Hypothesis
Following Freeman (1984), this research will approach corporate decision making as the
focal point where cooperative and competing stakeholder interests meet. In order to move
beyond purely economic explanations for CSR this study wont use the classic maximizing
rational actor framework, but instead analyze the topic from an institutional theory point of view
(Selznick, 1957). Institutional theory allows researchers to examine the impact of group culture
and cognition on corporate decision making as independent variables. Selznick argued (1957)
that corporate behavior is not solely driven by the motivation to maximize profit, but that it is
underpinned by specific ethical views. He argued that these values and norms are integral to
corporate culture and are used by firms to differentiate themselves in the market. This study

Running head: ENGAGING IN CSR

contends that successful firms will bring a value package to market that aligns well with the
norms and expectations of the wider social environment on which they depend for resources, e.g.
funds, information and labor. Following from this analysis, this study proposes,
Hypothesis 1: Corporate managers view CSR more positively related to public
responsibility and legitimacy than financial benefits for their organization.
Literature Review
This research project will start with an in-depth critical analysis of relevant academic
literature and a detailed study of the CSR documents of the corporations that will be included in
the study. This literature review will form the first part of the data collection and data analysis
process. Guided by the research question, relevant primary and secondary sources will be
scanned for recurring themes and key words. On the basis of the patterns and themes identified,
factors are likely to present themselves as potential determinants of a firms CSR strategy. The
validity of these postulated factors will be further explored during the interviews with corporate
managers. The key themes identified during the literature review stage will form the basis upon
which the interview questionnaire will be constructed. Given the large number of firms that will
be included in the study, 100 US corporations in total, literature review will be limited to texts
produced during the past 25 years.
Research Methodology
In order to identify the primary reasons corporations engage in activities that benefit
society this study will use an inductive exploratory research approach. The qualitative data thus
obtained will then be used to test the hypothesis outlined above. The stated views of senior
corporate decision makers will form this studys primary data source. These views will be

Running head: ENGAGING IN CSR

analyzed in the context of key primary and secondary written sources, such as corporate
publications and relevant academic literature.
Sampling Strategy
In this study 100 managers from a diverse range of US corporations will be interviewed
in order to explore their views on what motivates firms to engage in CSR initiatives. This study
will limit itself to interviewing senior decision makers as they are believed to be most informed
about corporate strategy. Interviewees will consequently be selected using a non-probability,
purposive approach, combining maximum variation and criterion sampling strategies (Miles
& Huberman, 1994: 28). This study recognizes that sampling will need to be flexible and occur
in dialogue with field incidents, contingencies and discoveries (Gobo, 2004, 436).
The Interviewing Process
The interviewing process will be based on a semi-structured format. The interview
questionnaire will function primarily as a checklist to ensure that all key themes identified during
the literature review stage will be discussed with all participants. The rationale for choosing this
semi-structured approach is the fact that, this way, the project will reap the benefits that flow
from in-depth interviewing whilst still ensuring that all key topics will be discussed with all
interviewees. The in-depth interview method is based on the premise that subjects are in the best
position to observe and understand their own motivations, opinions, values and behaviors
(Austin & Pinkleton, 2006; Broom & Dozier, 1990). In-depth interviewing is by necessity free
form in nature as the interviewer follows up on the points raised by the interviewee. This method
of data collection yields a wealth of detail (Wimmer and Dominick 2003: 127) which is perfect
for exploratory research. The questionnaire will not be considered to be immutable. Participants
will be encouraged to raise and elaborate upon issues not listed in the questionnaire provided

Running head: ENGAGING IN CSR

they are relevant to CSR strategizing. Themes frequently brought up in this manner will be added
to the questionnaire to ensure that they are also discussed with future interviewees.
Interviews will be conducted by telephone by a team of researchers. Phone calls will be
audio taped and last between 30 and 60 minutes. A second call may be made to participants if it
is found that important themes were not adequately covered during the initial phone call. Great
care will be taken to arrange calls at times that are convenient for the interviewees. Prior to
interviewing, potential participants will be contacted and informed about the content and nature
of the research project. They will be asked to give their written informed consent to participate in
the study and be audio taped, indicating their understanding of the contents and their willingness
to participate in the research. Participants will be offered complete confidentiality in order to
encourage participation and enable them to talk freely about sensitive issues without concern for
repercussions. Given the limited impact this qualitative study will have on the participants, it is
recommended to fall under Shenandoah Universitys IRB classification of expedited.
Data Analysis
The interviews will be fully transcribed by the researchers, supported by a team of audio
typists. Qualitative data analysis software (i.e. QUALRUS and NUD.IST) will be used to
identify adequate categories and concepts for structuring this data set. This computer aided
analysis will build on and extend the recurring themes and patterns identified during the
literature review stage and the interview process itself. Once a comprehensive set of themes has
been identified a response matrix will be built in Excel in order to group answers and comments
to each question according to identified response patterns. This response matrix will in turn be
used to build a conceptually clustered matrix display (Miles & Huberman 1994, 127) in order to
further reduce the interview data into thematically similar macro and micro categories. Selected

Running head: ENGAGING IN CSR

10

verbatim quotes will be included within the matrix to illustrate each category. This display will
pave the way for drawing and verifying conclusions based on patterns and themes identified in
the data and enable the researchers to test the hypothesis against the qualitative data obtained.
Limitations
One potential weakness of this study is the fact that the interview data presents a
snapshot of managers view on CSR. However, making sense of current motivations for CSR
initiatives requires some understanding of the longitudinal process of the institutionalization of
such initiatives (Aldrich & Fiol, 1994). This study will seek to overcome this problem by a
thorough literature review, which includes historical industry and organizational documents,
combined with interviews which include retrospective data.
This studys flexible purposive sampling strategy will enable it to overcome the problem
of non-response that often plagues quantitative survey interviewers. Furthermore, its relatively
freeform approach to interviewing will enable interviewers to make sure that participants have
properly understood all questions. However, the flip side of this non-random sampling approach
and non-standardized data collection methodology is that its findings cannot necessarily be
generalized to all corporate US managers, in spite of its relatively large sample. This is a
limitation that is inherent to qualitative research as data obtained in this manner reflects the
socially constructed nature of reality, the intimate relationship between the researcher and what
is studied, and the situational constraints that shape inquiry (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005, 22).
However, although the findings of this study cannot be assumed to be generally applicable, they
are still likely to be highly indicative of the actual factors that shape corporate decision making
regarding CSR. Furthermore, they would form a perfect starting point for future quantitative
research on this topic that can be generalized.

Running head: ENGAGING IN CSR

11

Research Phase Two Quantitative Study

Problem Statement
Why have some corporations long made explicit their attachment to CSR, whereas other
companies have tended to be more implicit with relatively few specific corporate claims being
made? To understand this question, the desire of companies to work with the not-for-profit sector
will be explored and the resulting increase in social capital (Putnam, 1995) that is potentially
achieved through support for the community. Using a purposive sample of data collected from
100 U.S. Fortune 500 companies from the Association for Investment Management and Research
Corporate Information Committee Reports database, a quantitative study will be conducted to
measure the frequency of difference between the levels of disclosure and corresponding CSR
ratings for selected firms between 2010 and 2011.
Bourdieu, Putnam and Coleman are the authors most often credited with introducing key
thoughts and impulses to the contemporary debate about social capital. As part of his concept of
different kinds of capital, Bourdieu (1983) sees social capital as a resource used by privileged
people to maintain their upper status within society. Coleman (1988, 1990) has a more optimistic
view. He defines social capital as a public good which almost entirely brings about benign
results: on the basis of clear norms and sanctions, individuals co-operate for mutual advantage.
Putnam (1993, 1995, 2000), who differentiates between bonding and bridging social capital, also
has a rather optimistic view, seeing functioning networks as the precondition for a viable civil
engagement leading to healthy civil societies.
All three understand social capital, in the form of networks and shared norms and values,
as resources for co-operation and mutual advantage. Actors capable of drawing on these
resources improve their personal well-being and their status within society. While Bourdieu

Running head: ENGAGING IN CSR

12

describes social capital as an exclusive asset of the privileged groups of society, Coleman and
Putnam optimistically assume that social capital may be employed by almost everybody for
everyones sake. Implicitly, the vision is formulated of the resources and capabilities that
constitute social capital being employed for favorable ends. Unfortunately, as a few authors point
out (e.g. Woolcock 1998; Fukuyama 2000; Ostrom and Ahn 2003; Field 2003), this is not always
the case.
Hypotheses
This research theorizes that the primary reason companies work with the not-for-profit
sector is the perceived increase in social capital. Therefore this study proposes,
Hypothesis 2: Organizations view CSR more positively when there is a perceived social
capital benefit that results from participation.
Literature Review Plan
This study employs a critical review of the scholarly and peer-reviewed literature in an
exploratory fashion to answer the guiding research questions. In his book, Social Research
Methods (5th ed.), Neuman (2003) reports that, Reviewing the accumulated knowledge about a
question is an essential early step in the research process. Both primary and secondary sources
will be consulted, and a qualitative assessment will be made as to the relevance of the material
for the purposes of this analysis. This paper utilizes the techniques commonly found in other
literature studies, following the qualitative data analysis proposed by Miles and Huberman
(1984). First, a computer search in the online datastores (Springer Link, etc) will conducted to
collect relevant studies. Search strings related to CSR will be used to collect relevant literature.
Second, the results of the found articles will be scanned manually for relevancy to this research.
Third, certain articles from this list will be excluded. This includes single cases and limited

Running head: ENGAGING IN CSR

13

multiple case studies since they rather help at exploring a field than at providing valid results for
large populations. Lastly, CSR literature published before 1987 will be excluded from this study
since it is recognized that the Brundtland Report (The World Commission on Environment and
Development, 1987) can be seen as a turning point in the attention toward CSR (cf. Cohen and
Winn, 2007; Hueting, 1990; Schubert and Lang, 2005). The organizational consequences of that
report as well as organizational reactions and consumers responses are not likely to enter
academic research before 1987.
Research Approach
To examine the relationship between firms' disclosures and measures of social
responsibility, this study will use CSR ratings provided by the annual Association for Investment
Management and Research Corporate Information Committee Reports (AIMR Reports) as
proxies for the degree of social capital benefit received by the sample firms. Disclosure rankings
provided by AIMR are used to measure participation level through public disclosure.
To measure the relationship between social capital benefit and CSR participation, the
levels of disclosure ratings and corresponding CSR ratings for each firm included in the sample
will be compared for the year 2010, and for the year 2011 (which is the latest data set included in
the AIMR dataset). If there is no correlation, the average difference between the levels of
disclosure and corresponding CSR ratings for each firm included in the sample is not significant
and the null hypothesis holds. The paired-samples t-test is used to test the hypothesis of no
difference between the two variables.
Sampling Strategy
The population for the study consists of companies listed in the AIMR dataset. A
purposive sample of 100 Fortune 500 companies will be selected from the 2010 dataset and the

Running head: ENGAGING IN CSR

14

same companies from the 20111 dataset. The reason Fortune 500 companies are selected is that
previous research on CSR shows that firm size has either a positive (Branco and Rodrigues,
2008) or a U shaped effect on CSR projects (Udayasankar, 2008). It is therefore expected that
large companies are more likely to conduct socially responsible activities and would be more
relevant to this research study.
Data Collection
Data on the accounting disclosures of firms are taken from the annual Association for
Investment Management and Research Corporate Information Committee Reports (AIMR
Reports). These reports provide annual intra-industry rankings of firms' disclosure practices.
Firms in each industry are rated by a committee of analysts who follow that industry. Three
disclosure performance rankings are assigned to each firm based on the level of disclosure
provided by the firm's: (1) annual reports and 10-Ks, (2) quarterly reports and other published
materials voluntarily issued by the firm, and (3) investor relations programs. An aggregate score,
which is a weighted average of these three categories, is also provided. This aggregate score will
be used as the disclosure score.
A CSR score is also assigned by AIMR and is comprised of the total of the scores
assigned to the firm in each of the following areas: (1) company policies regarding the
advancement of women and minorities in the workplace (separate scores were assigned to each
by the CEP), (2) philanthropic activities, and (3) involvement in community projects (such as
volunteer programs, school partnerships and investments in housing and businesses in low
income neighborhoods).

Data Analysis

Running head: ENGAGING IN CSR

15

In addition to descriptive statistics (distribution, central tendency, and dispersion), a paired ttest will be used to compare means of the two measured variables (CSR score and disclosure score).
A paired t-test is used when the comparisons do not involve two independently drawn samples of
observations but rather changes in one sample of observations where each individual observation in
the before situation is paired to the same observation in the after situation. The paired t-test looks
at the average difference and the variability in the individual observations differences to assess
whether they are the result of random chance or the change event because their magnitude exceeds
the differences that would be attributable to random chance. A two-tailed t -test with a 0.05 alphalevel (95 percent confidence level) will be used. A two-tailed t-test considers both possibilities that
the after case may be either (1) greater than or (2) less than the before case.

Limitations
There are several limitations of the study. First, correlation of information sources and
data collection methods may significantly increase the possibility of both the validity and
reliability problems in AIMR ratings. Second, a proportionate strata sampling by expanding the
sample frame could be more appropriate. Finally, this study does not evaluate the reasons why
organizations CSR more positively when there is a perceived social capital benefit that results
from participation. Further research should include a longitudinal study of organizations in terms
of CSR projects and possible explanations. In addition, the study could be reproduced expanding
the sample-years observed.

Running head: ENGAGING IN CSR

16
References

Aldrich, H. E. & Fiol, C. M (1994). Fools Rush In? The Institutional Context of Industry
Creation. Academy of Management Review, 19(4), 645-670.
Austin, E. & Pinkleton, B. (2006). Strategic Public Relations Management: Planning And
Managing Effective Communication Programs (2nd ed.) New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Inc.
Bourdieu, P. (1983). "The Forms of Capital." Pp. 241-58 in Handbook of Theory and
Researchfor the Sociology of Education, edited by John G . Richardson . Westport, CT.:
Greenwood Press.
Brnn, P. S., & Vidaver-Cohen, D. (2009). Corporate Motives For Social Initiative: Legitimacy,
Sustainability Or The Bottom Line? Journal of Business Ethics, 87(1), 91-109.
Branco MC, Rodrigues LL (2008). Factors Influencing Social Responsibility Disclosure by
Portuguese Companies. J. Bus. Ethics 83 (4): 685701.
Broom, G., & Dozier, D. (1990). Using research in public relations. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Burt, R. (1983). Corporate philanthropy as a cooptive relation. Social Forces, 62: 419-449.
Denzin, Norman, K. & Lincoln, Yvonna, S. 2005 The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research
(3rd ed.) Thousand Oakes: Sage Publications.
Campbell, J. L (2007). Why Would Corporations Behave in Socially Responsible Ways? An
Institutional Theory of Corporate Social Responsibility, Academy of Management Review,
32, 2, 946-967.
Cohen, B. and M. I. Winn (2007). Market Imperfections, Opportunity and Sustainable
Entrepreneurship, Journal of Business Venturing 22(1), 2949.

Running head: ENGAGING IN CSR

17

Coleman, James S. (1988). Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital, American Journal of
Sociology. 94.
Coleman, James S. (1990). Foundations of Social Theory, Cambridge: Harvard University Press
Creyer, E. H. & Ross, W. T. (1997). The influence of firm behavior on purchase intention: Do
consumers really care about business ethics? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 14: 421432.
Ellen, P., Mohr, L. & Webb, D. (2000). Charitable programs and the retailer: Do they mix?
Journal of Retailing, 76: 393-406.
Evan, W.M. & Freeman, R.E. (1990). Corporate Governance: A stakeholder Interpretation,
Journal of Behaviour Economics, 19: 337-59.
Field, J. (2003). Social Capital (London: Routledge).
Freeman, R.E. (1984). Strategic Management: A stakeholder Approach. Boston, MA: Pitman.
Fukuyama, F. (2000). Social Capital and Civil Society (International Monetary Fund Working
Paper, WP/00/74; Washington, DC: IMF): 1-18.
Gobo, G., (2004) Sampling, Representativeness and Generalizability. In Seale, Clive, Gobo,
Giampietro, Gubrium, Jaber F. and Silverman, David, Qualitative Research Practice
Thousand Oakes: Sage Publications.
Hueting, R. (1990). The Brundtland Report: A Matter of Conflicting Goals, Ecological
Economics 2(2), 109117.
Margolis, J. & Walsh, J. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by
business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48: 268-305.
Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M, (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An expanded sourcebook
(2nd ed.), Sage: London & Thousand Oaks, California.

Running head: ENGAGING IN CSR

18

Miller, J. and Doug G., (2007). Corporate social responsibility: Institutional response to labor,
legal and shareholder environments. In G.T. Solomon (ed.) Best Paper Proceedings of the
Academy of Management. Philadelphia, PA George Washington University Press.
Neuman, W. L. (2003). Social research methods: qualitative and quantitative approaches (5 ed.).
Boston: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.
Ostrom, E., and T.K. Ahn (eds.) (2003). Foundations of Social Capital (Cheltenham, UK:
Edward Elgar).
Powell, W. W. & DiMaggio, P. J. (1991). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis.
Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
Putnam, R., Leonardi, R. and Nanetti, R. Y. (1993). Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions
in Modern Italy. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Putnam, R. (1995). Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital. Journal of Democracy 6
(1): 6578.
Putnam, R.(2000). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New
York: Simon & Schuster.
Schubert, A. and I. Lang (2005). The Literature Aftermath of the Brundtland Report Our
Common Future. A Scientometric Study Based on Citations in Science and Social Science
Journals, Environment Development and Sustainability 7(1), 18.
Selznick, P. (1948). Foundations of the Theory of Organizations. American Sociological Review
13: 25-35.
Selznick, P. (1949). TVA and the Grass Roots. University of California Press, Berkley, CA.
Selznick, P. (1957). Leadership in Administration, A Sociological Interpretation New York:
Harper & Row.

Running head: ENGAGING IN CSR

19

Sen, S. & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer
reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing, 38: 225-243.
Starbucks (2003). Corporate Social Responsibility, Annual Report, Fiscal 2002, Retrieved on
04.24.2012 from http://aspdf.com/view/7291/corporate-social-responsibility-pdf.html
Starbucks (2004). Awards and accolades. Retrieved 04.24.2012 from
http://www.starbucks.com/aboutus/recognition.asp.
Turban, D. B. and Greening, D. W. (1997). Corporate social performance and organizational
attractiveness to prospective employees. Academy of Management Journal, 40: 658-672.
Udayasankar K (2008). Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Size. J. Bus. Ethics 83(2): 167175.
WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development) (1987). Our Common Future.
Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Webb, N. J. and Farmer, A. 1996. Corporate goodwill: A game theoretic approach to the effect
of corporate charitable expenditures on firm behavior. Annals of Public and Cooperative
Economics, 67: 29-50.
Wimmer, R. D., & Dominick, J. R. 2003. Mass media research: An introduction (7th ed.).
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Woolcock, M. 1998. Social Capital and Economic Development: Toward a Theoretical
Synthesis and Policy Framework, Theory and Society 27.1: 151-208.
.