Gestão & Produção
https://www.gestaoeproducao.com/article/doi/10.1590/0104-530x025-18
Gestão & Produção
Artigo Original

Metanálise da relação entre a performance social e a performance financeira corporativa

Meta-analysis of the relation between corporate social performance and corporate financial performance

Ralph Santos da Silva; João Maurício Gama Boaventura; Rodrigo Bandeira-de-Mello

http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0104-530x025-18 Gest. Prod., vol.25, n4, p.764-776, 2018
Downloads: 0
Views: 975

Resumo

Resumo Segundo a teoria dos stakeholders, empresas que coordenam os interesses dos diversos stakeholders apresentam um desempenho superior àquelas que priorizam apenas os interesses dos shareholders e, portanto, um melhor desempenho social corporativo – CSP, entenda-se melhor atendimento dos interesses dos stakeholders, leva a um melhor desempenho financeiro corporativo – CFP. O interesse desse tema desencadeou a realização de dezenas de pesquisas empíricas testando a relação entre CSP e CFP. No início da década de 2000, a predominância dos estudos empíricos revelava uma associação positiva entre CSP e CFP e, em função disso, a comunidade acadêmica aceitou ser essa relação normalmente positiva. Entretanto, ao menos duas questões chamam atenção: “A predominância da relação positiva entre CSP e CFP ainda persiste em pesquisas mais recentes?” e “Quais stakeholders estão mais associados positivamente ao desempenho financeiro?” Em função dessas questões, o objetivo desta pesquisa é a análise da relação CSP-CFP a partir das pesquisas empíricas dos últimos anos. Empregou-se a técnica de metanálise aplicando-a aos dados dos artigos empíricos publicados entre 1998 e 2010. Os resultados não confirmam uma generalização da relação positiva entre a CSP e a CFP, além disso, na análise individual, as relações entre o desempenho junto a cada stakeholder e o desempenho financeiro, apenas o stakeholder funcionário apresentou clara relação positiva. Esses resultados sugerem mais cautela no uso gerencial da premissa de uma relação CSP-CFP positiva e a recomendação de mais estudos quanto às nuances dessa relação.

Palavras-chave

Stakeholder, Responsabilidade social, Performance social, Performance financeira, Metanálise

Abstract

Abstract According to the stakeholder theory, companies which coordinate the interests of their several stakeholders show better performance than companies which prioritize only shareholders’ interests, and thus also show a better corporate social performance (CSP, or better addressing stakeholders’ interests), which leads to a better corporate financial performance (CFP). The interest in this subject has elicited a series of empirical studies testing the relation between CSP and CFP. In the beginning of the 2000’s most part of those studies revealed a positive association between CSP and CFP and consequently academia has taken it to be generally positive. However at least two issues deserve closer examination: “Does the prevalence of a positive relation between CSP and CFP still hold in more recent research?” and “Which stakeholders are more positively associated to the financial performance?” The aim of the present paper is to analyze the relation between CSP and CFP in the light of empirical research in the last few years. The meta-analysis technique, has been employed on articles published between 1998 and 2010. Results do not confirm generalization of a positive relation between CSP and CFP. Furthermore, when the link between each stakeholder’s performance and respective financial performance was tested, only the “employee” stakeholder presented a clear positive relation. Such results suggest a more cautious use of the positive CSP/CFP relation by company management, as well as the pursuit of further studies on the nuances of this relation.

Keywords

Stakeholder, Social responsibility, Social performance, Financial performance, Meta-analysis

Referências

Aras G., Aybars A., Kutlu O. Managing corporate performance: investigating the relationship between corporate social responsibility and financial performance in emerging markets. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management. 2010;59(3):229-54.

Aupperle K. E., Carrol A. B., Hatfield J. D. An empirical examination of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and profitability. Academy of Management Journal. 1985;28(2):446-63.

Barnett M. L. Stakeholder influence capacity and the variability of financial returns to corporate social respons. Academy of Management Review. 2007;32(3):794-816.

Berman S. L., Wicks A. C., Kotha S., Jones T. M. Look at the financial-social performance nexus when quality of management is held constant. Academy of Management Journal. 1999;42(5):488-506.

Bird R., Hall D. A., Momentè F., Reggiani F. What corporate social activities are valued by the market?. Journal of Business Ethics. 2007;76(2):189-206.

Boaventura J. M. G., Silva R. S., Bandeira-de-Mello R. Performance financeira corporativa e performance social corporativa: desenvolvimento metodológico e contribuição teórica dos estudos empíricos. Revista Contabilidade & Finanças. 2012;23(60):232-45.

Bouslah K., Zali B., Turcotte M. F., Kooli M. The impact of forest certification on firm financial performance in Canada and the U.S. Journal of Business Ethics. 2010;96(4):551-72.

Callan S. J., Thomas J. M. Corporate financial performance and corporate social performance. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. 2009;16(2):61-78.

Carroll A. A three-dimensional model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review. 1979;4(4):497-505.

Chih H.-L., Chih H.-H., Chen T.-Y. On the determinants of corporate social responsibility: international evidence on the financial industry. Journal of Business Ethics. 2010;93(1):115-35.

Choi J., Wang H. Stakeholder relations and the persistence of corporate financial performance. Strategic Management Journal. 2009;30(4):895-907.

Clarkson M. B. E. A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review. 1995;20(1):92-117.

Coase R. H. The nature of the firm. Economica. 1937;4(16):386-405.

Cochran P. L., Wood R. A. Corporate social responsibility and financial performance. Academy of Management Journal. 1984;27(1):42-56.

Coombs J. E., Gilley K. M. Stakeholder management as predictor of CEO compensation: main effects and interaction with financial performance. Strategic Management Journal. 2005;26(9):827-40.

Craig J., Dibrell C. The natural environment, innovation, and firm performance: a comparative study. Family Business Review. 2006;19(4):275-88.

Elsayed K., Paton D. The impact of financial performance on environmental policy: does firm life cycle matter?. Business Strategy and the Environment. 2009;18(6):397-413.

Evan W. M., Freeman R. E. A stakeholder theory of the modern corporation: Katian capitalism.. Ethical issues in business. 1993:166-71.

Fauzi H., Idris K. M. The relationship of CSR and financial performance: new evidence from Indonesian companies. Issues in Social and Environmental Accounting. 2009;3(1):66-87.

Freeman R. E. Strategic management: a stakeholder approach.. 1984.

Friedman M. The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Times Magazine. 1970:33-5.

Frooman J. Stakeholder influences strategies. Academy of Management Review. 1999;24(2):191-205.

Galbreath J. Does primary stakeholder management positively affect the bottom line? Some evidence from Australia. Management Decision. 2006;44(8):1106-21.

Glass G. V. Primary, secondary and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher. 1976;5(10):3-8.

Gooding R. Z., Wagner 3rd. J. A. A meta-analytic review of the relationship between size and performance: The productivity efficiency of organizations and their subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly. 1985;30(4):462-81.

Graves S. B., Waddock S. A. A look at the financial-social performance nexus when quality of management is held constant. International Journal of Value-Based Management. 1999;12(1):87-99.

Hayes R. H., Wheelwright S. C. Restoring our competitive edge.. 1984.

Hillman P., Keim G. D. Stakeholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues: what’s the bottom line?. Strategic Management Journal. 2001;22(2):125-39.

Hopkins M. Defining indicators to assess socially responsible enterprises. Futures. 1997;29(7):581-603.

Hunter J. E., Schmidt F. L. Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting and bias in research findings.. 1990.

Jensen M. Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance. 2001;14(3):8-21.

Jones T. M. Instrumental stakeholder theory: a synthesis of ethics and economics. Academy of Management Review. 1995;20(2):404-37.

Lee D. D., Faff R. W., Langfield-Smith K. Revisiting the vexing question: does superior corporate social performance lead to improved financial performance?. Australian Journal of Management. 2009;34(1):21-49.

Lougee B., Wallace J. The corporate social responsibility (CSR) trend. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance. 2008;20(1):96-108.

Mahoney L., LaGore W., Scazzero J. A. Corporate social performance, financial performance for firms that restate earnings. Issues in Social and Environmental Accounting. 2008;2(1):104-30.

Makni R., Francoeur C., Bellavance F. Causality between corporate social performance and financial performance: Evidence from Canadian firms. Journal of Business Ethics. 2009;89(3):409-22.

Margolis J. D., Walsh J. P. Misery loves companies: rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly. 2003;48(2):268-305.

Mazis M., Green R. Implementing social responsibility. MSU Business Topics. 1971:68-76.

Mishra S., Suar D. Does corporate social responsibility influence firm performance of Indian companies?. Journal of Business Ethics. 2010;95(4):571-601.

Nelling E., Webb E. Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: the “virtuous circle” revisited. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting. 2009;32(2):197-209.

Orlitzky M., Schmidt F. L., Rynes S. L. Corporate social and financial performance: a meta-analysis. Organization Studies. 2003;24(3):403-41.

Porter M. E. Competitive strategy.. 1980.

Richard O. C., Ford D., Ismail K. Exploring the performance effects of visible attribute diversity: the moderating role of span of control and organizational life cycle. International Journal of Human Resource Management. 2006;17(12):2091-109.

Rosenthal R. The File Drawer Problem and tolerance for nulls results. Psychological Bulletin. 1979;86(3):638-41.

Ruf B. M., Muralidhar K., Brown R. M., Janney J. J., Paul K. An Empirical Investigation of the Relationship Between Change in Corporate Social Performance and Financial Performance: A Stakeholder Theory Perspective. Journal of Business Ethics. 2001;32(2):143-56.

Slack N., Chambers S., Johnston R. Administração da produção.. 2002.

Stevenson W. J. Estatística aplicada à administração.. 1981.

Surroca J., Tribó J. A. Managerial entrenchment and corporate social performance. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting. 2008;35(5):748-89.

Ullmann A. A. Data in search of a theory: a critical examination of economic performance on U.S. firms. Academy of Management Review. 1985;10(3):540-57.

Van Beurden P., Gössling T. The worth of values: a literature review on the relation between corporate social and financial performance. Journal of Business Ethics. 2008;82(2):407-24.

Van der Laan G., Van Ees H., Van Witteloostuijn A. Corporate social and financial performance: an extended stakeholder theory, and empirical test with accounting measures. Journal of Business Ethics. 2008;79(3):299-310.

Waddock S. A., Graves S. B. The corporate social performance-financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal. 1997;18(4):303-19.

Whetten D. A., Rands G., Godfrey P. What are the responsibilities to society?. Handbook of strategy and management.. 2002.

Wood D. J., Jones R. Stakeholder mismatching: a theoretical problem in empirical research on corporate social performance. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis. 1995;3(3):229-67.

Wood D. J. Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review. 1991;16(4):691-718.

Wood D. J. Measuring corporate social performance: a review. International Journal of Management Reviews. 2010;1(1):50-84.

5defb6360e8825a405b5f733 gp Articles
Links & Downloads
1806-9649 (Eletrônico) 0104-530X (Impresso)
Gest. Prod. ©2024 Todos os direitos reservados.

Gest. Prod.

Share this page
Page Sections