This article reports the findings, analysis, and commentary on survey results of academicians in the Social Issues in Management (SIM) field. The three major themes guiding the study were (a) current and future research in the SIM field, (b) strengths and weaknesses of research in the SIM field, and (c) research versus management practice in the SIM field. A number of specific questions were posed: What are the current topics on which you are conducting research? What topics do you see as most important for the SIM field for the balance of the 1990s? What recent articles will most impact SIM research in the 1990s? What are the strengths and weaknesses of current SIM research? What topics will be most relevant to practicing managers? What recommendations do you propose for bridging the gap between SIM research and management practice? The experts' responses were categorized and discussed so that current and future scholars might have a basepoint for evaluating future research. The analysis and commentary concludes with a SIM research framework for the 1990s.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Carroll, A. B.
(1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 4, 497-505.
2.
Clarkson, M.B.E.
(1988). Corporate social performance in Canada, 1976-1986. In L. Preston (Ed.), Research in corporate social performance and policy (Vol. 10, pp. 241-266). -Greenwich, CT: JAI.
3.
Clarkson, M.B.E.
(1991). Defining, evaluating, and managing corporate social performance: The stakeholder management model. In J. Post (Ed.), Research in corporate social performance and policy (Vol. 12, pp. 331-358). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
4.
Clarkson, M.B.E.
(1993). A stakeholder theory of the firm: Building on Preston, Carroll, Wartick and Cochran, and Wood. In J. Pasquero & D. Collins (Eds.), International Associationfor Business and Society: 1993 Proceedings (San Diego), 77-83.
5.
Epstein, E. M.
(1987). Thecorporate social policy process: Beyond business ethics, corporate social responsibility and corporate social responsiveness. California Management Review, 29(3), 99-114.
6.
Fleming, J. E.
(1987). A survey and critique of business ethics research, 1986. In L. Preston (Ed.), Research in corporate social performance and policy (Vol, 9, pp. 1-23). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
7.
Fox, I.
, & Marcus, A. (1992). The causes and consequences of leveraged buyouts. Academy of Management Review, 17(1), 62-85.
8.
Frederick, W. C.
(1978). From CSRI to CSR2: The maturing of business and society thought (Working Paper No. 279). Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh, Graduate School of Business.
9.
Freeman, R. E.
, & Liedtka, J. (1991). Corporate social responsibility: A critical approach. Business Horizons, 34(4), 92-98.
10.
Gatewood, R. D.
, Carroll, A. B. (1991). Assessment of ethical performance of organization members: A conceptual framework. Academy of Management Review, 16(4), 667-690.
11.
Jones, T. M.
(1983). An integrating framework for research in business and society: A step toward the elusive paradigm. Academy of Management Review, 8(4), 559-564.
12.
Jones, T. M.
(1991). Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: An issuecontingent model. Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 366-395.
13.
Kahn, W. A.
(1990). Toward an agenda for business ethics research. Academy of Management Review, 15, 311-327.
14.
Lyles, M. A.
(1990). A research agenda for strategic management in the 1990s. Journal of Management Studies, 27(4), 363-375.
15.
Mitnick, B. M.
(1993). Organizing research in corporate social performance: The CSP system as core paradigm. In J. Pasquero & D. Collins (Eds.), International Association for Business and Society: 1993 Proceedings (San Diego), 2-15.
16.
Oliver, C.
(1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 145-179.
17.
Porter, L. W.
, & McKibbin, L. E. (1988). Management education and development: Drift or thrust into the 21st century. New York: McGraw-Hill.
18.
Preston, L. E.
(1986). Business and public policy. Journal of Management, 12(2), 261-275.
19.
Preston, L. E.
, & Post, J. E. (1975). Private management and public policy: The principle of public responsibility. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
20.
Randall, D. M.
, & Fernandes, M. F. (1991). The social desirability response bias in ethics research. Journal of Business Ethics, 10, 805-817.
21.
Randall, D. M.
, & Gibson, A. M. (1990). Methodology in business ethics research: A review and critical assessment. Journal of Business Ethics, 9, 457-471.
22.
Reed, L.
, Getz, K., Collins, D., Oberman, W., & Toy, R. (1990). Theoretical models and empirical results: A review and synthesis of JAI volumes 1-10. In L. Preston (Ed.), Corporation and society research: Studies in theory and measurement (pp. 27-62). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
23.
Sethi, S. P.
(1975). Dimensions of corporate social performance: An analytical framework. California Management Review, 58-64.
24.
Sodeman, W. A.
, Van Deusen, C. A., & Carroll, A. B. (1993). Wet behind the ears: An examination of new social issues in management faculty's views on SIM research. In J. Pasquero & D. Collins (Eds.), International Association for Business and Society: 1993 Proceedings (San Diego), 573-578.
25.
Velasquez, M.
(1992). International business morality and the common good. Business Ethics Quarterly, 2(1), 27-40.
26.
Wartick, S. L.
, & Cochran, P. L. (1985). The evolution of the corporate social performance model. Academy of Management Review, 10, 758-769.
27.
Wood, D. J.
(1991a). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16(4), 691-718.
28.
Wood, D. J.
(199lb). Social issues in management: Theory and research in corporate social performance. Journal of Management, 17(2), 383-406.
29.
Wood, D. J.
, & Cochran, P. L. (1992). Business and society in transition. Business & Society, 31(1), 1-7.
