Corporate social performance

Relevant terms for examining an organization s role beyond its traditional walls include corporate social responsibility (GSR) and corporate social performance (CSP), concepts currently used in part to assess the Fortune 500 most-admired companies. Both terms expand an organization s responsibilities beyond its traditional economic shareholders to multiple stakeholders, including the community (Greening Turban, 2000 Hutchins Sutherland, 2008 Rowley Berman, 2000 Valiente, Ayerbe, Figueras, 2012). Carroll (1979) developed one of the earlier versions of a comprehensive view of corporate social performance and has reiterated his opinion (Carroll, 2000) that social performance review should include a comprehensive assessment of actions related to most social issues and stakeholders. 

Corporate social performance and corporate social responsibility focus on a direct business-related role vis-a-vis the community, with an emphasis on the strategic and bottom-line implications of socially responsible corporate practices (Heal, 2008 Werther Chandler, 2011). Both constructs stem from the recognition that the economic actions of business entities have noneconomic consequences and that business organizations have an impact on other societal institutions beyond their economic sphere. 

Greening, D. W., Turban, D. B. (2000). Corporate social performance as a competitive advantage in attracting a quality workforce. Business Society, 39, 254-280. doi l 0.1177/000765030003900302... 

Ram, H. (2002, March 9). The A-Z of fair trade Harry Ram explains why the decision to make the switch to lair trade produce should be as easy as ABC. The Independent, p. 1. Retrieved from http // WWW. questia. com/library/1P2-1668301 / fair-trade-the-a-z-of-fair -trade-harry-ram-explains articleDetails Rowley, T., Berman, S. (2000). A brand new brand of corporate social performance. Business Society, 39, 397- 18. doi 10.1177/00076 5030003900404... 

Orlitzky et al. (2003) conclude that market forces generally do not penalize companies that are high in corporate social performance and thus, managers can afford to be socially responsible. Their results of the meta-analysis revealed a positive association between social/environmental performance (CSP) and corporate financial performance (CFP) across industries and across study contexts. If managers believe that CSP is a prerequisite for CFP, they may actively pursue CSP in the belief that the market will reward them for such efforts. The company s executives and top-leadership must be attentive to the perceptions of third parties, regardless of whether they are market analysts, public interest groups or the media (Orlitzky et al. 2003). 

Gricar, B. (1983) A Preliminary Theory of Compliance with OSHA Regulation , Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy 5 121—41. 

Sustainability as a concept seems to have become more prominent than others such as the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) initiative, Corporate Responsibility and Citizenship, Responsible Business, Responsible Care, and Corporate Social Performance. Practitioners also refer to 3P— People, Planet, and Profit— The Triple Bottom Line and 3E— Equity, Environment, and Economy. 

Sustainable Development, Sustainability, Corporate Social Responsibility, are terms often used to describe the trend towards enhanced performance and reporting with respect to environmental, social, and economic indicators. 

Input from internal and external stakeholders is also critical to continuous improvement and our continued success. GSK actively seeks stakeholder involvement for its Plan for Excellence and its Corporate Social Responsibility initiatives. In addition, customer feedback is routinely obtained and helps to focus attention on issues that affect the public through the consumption of GSK products. GSK has also published reports of its EHS performance since 1992 and has continued to develop and enhance its reporting to align with many of the features recommended by the Global Reporting Initiative. 

Special Features The first global standard for measurement and reporting of social and ethical performance. A A 1,000 is a widely used standard for corporate social reporting in the UK. 

Special Features Workplace and environmental performance criteria. ICCR is the first major standard of corporate social responsibility movement to build a portfolio of holdings based on CSR criteria. The combined portfolio value now exceeds 110 billion. 

Margolis, J. D., Elfenbein, H. A., Walsh, J. P. (2007). Does it pay to be good A meta-analysis and redirection of research on the relationship between corporate social and financial performance. Retrieved from Stakeholder Marketing Consortium website http //stakeholder,bu... 

Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24, 403-441. doi 10.1177/0170840603024003910 Panapanaan, V., Linnanen, L. (2009). Finland. In S. O. Idowu W. L. Filho (Eds.), Global practices of corporate social responsibility (pp. 73-102). Berlin, Germany Springer. 

Sustainability and corporate social responsibility cover many similar aspects and principles as health, safety, environment and qualify management and sustainable manufacturing. Zink (2014) concludes his research that there is a need for a different understanding of the overall performance of a company which can be seen in following the discussion about corporate social responsibility. This will generate new chances for human factors including the three dimensions of sustainability economic, ecological and social. 

Although many safety issues have gained recognition in the shared workplaces and many tools and methods have been developed (especially for contractors in con-stmction sites), there are still many HSEQ and security threats related to supplier s management in global business environment. The whole supply chain needs to be considered and a comprehensive safety culture in shared workplace needs to be established. If company seeks to perform higher than average in the terms of HSEQ, they must ensure of corporate social responsibility and sustainable processes. HSEQ AP can be one method to support that purpose. 

Orlitzky M, Schmidt EL, Rynes SL (2003) Corporate social and financial performance a metaanalysis. Organ Stud 24(3) 403 141... 

Systems Thinking. The corporation is included in the Fomm Ethics Excellence Investment Register. Selection for inclusion in the register indicates that the corporation performs better than average in its sector in terms of corporate social responsibility ... 

Incorporated safety and safety performance into their corporate social responsibility program—they are not just saying that they will be safe but also putting their reputation on the line, daily, and in the mass media. 

Capabilities include customer-management, procurement, productitMi, and fulfillment, as shown in Fig. 1.5. With respect to the emerging paradigms, new capabilities must be emphasized fund management and social cost in both healthcare and humanitarian relief rapid fulfillment in humanitarian relief infrastructure performance, and social norms in emerging economies and corporate social responsibility (CSR) in sustainability. 

The evaluation factors used most frequently are price, quality, and delivery. Other possible factors would be production capacity and flexibility, technical capabilities and support, information and communication systems, financial status, innovation and R D, corporate social responsibility (CSR), safety awareness, political stability, cultural congruence with the buyer, and terrorism risk. Other frequently used factors include organization structure, training and development policies, performance history, reputation, amount of past business, warranties and claim policies, procedural comphance, and return policies. 

Although we focus on the financial performance of a firm in this book, money is by no means the only extent in which a corporation should be measured. As described in a popular 1992 Harvard Business Review article, the balanced scorecard introduced by Robert Kaplan and David Norton shows that financial performance is only one aspect of firm performance. Several other areas must be considered in the overall performance of an organization. For example, qualitative and nonfinancial measures such as environmental and corporate social responsibility measures are equally important. In addition, customer satisfaction, internal business processes, and learning each play important roles in organizations. 

---