Longitudinal Analysis of Corporate Social Responsibility on Company Websites

Abstract

As social issues increase, so does the scope of corporate social responsibility (CSR). Companies are expanding their CSR activities and making the terminology used to describe them more specific. This study compares website content ofFortune500 companies in 2015 with content collected in 2011. Traditionally, two CSR issues have been the dominant focus on company websites: community and environment. Findings reveal that these terms have decreased in usage and new terms have emerged, such as supply chain and volunteer involvement. A shift has occurred that business practitioners will find helpful in communicating CSR initiatives.

Keywords

corporate social responsibility social responsibility corporate communication company websites business communication business ethics stakeholder communication

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) refers to the responsibilities of businesses to society, extending beyond their direct obligations to stakeholders (Carroll, 2010). TheEuropean Commission (2001)defined CSR as the integration of social and environmental issues within business operations and in dealings with stakeholders. For over two decades, companies have known that there is no longer a question of whether to engage in CSR, but rather in which areas of responsibility to participate (Lichtenstein, Drumwright, & Braig, 2004;Linnhoff, Martin, Smith, & Smith, 2014;Prothero & McDonagh, 1992;Smith & Betts, 2015;Wry, Cobb, & Aldrich, 2013). The present study found that 99% ofFortune500 companies from 2015 participate in CSR. These companies must choose which social issue they will focus on, since there are numerous possibilities. Findings show additional social issues emerging, such as human exploitation within company supply chains, global citizenship, volunteerism, and employee training. In response, companies have increased the number of social issues with which they engage. The average number of CSR-related headings on aFortune500 website today is 6.4, which represents a 30% increase from 4 years ago. As this study will show, CSR terminology on company websites is not only increasing but it is also changing to reflect social concerns that have shifted since 2011.

Which social issue a company chooses may be influenced by public sentiment and company values. In turn, the application of CSR initiatives will affect management practices (Lichtenstein et al., 2004). Since company websites are an important mode of communication with consumers and stakeholders, monitoring websites is a crucial company activity (Verboven, 2011). For example, initiatives related to community and environment retained a prominent place within society for many years. Thus,communityandenvironmentwere used as CSR headings on company websites. Since this study shows that companies have significantly shifted the CSR terminology used on their websites since 2011 in response to social issues, this reinforces Verboven’s assertion that ongoing examination of websites is necessary.

A 1998 sample ofFortune500 companies revealed that 82% of the company websites made reference to a CSR issue, with the most commonly used headings being community, environment,education, andcharity(Esrock & Leichty, 1998). This percentage grew to almost 90% by 2006 (Luo & Bhattacharya, 2006). In 2011, more companies jumped on board with 98% addressing CSR issues on their websites (Smith & Alexander, 2013). The terms community and environment were still predominantly used; however, new issues had also emerged. These new issues, such assustainability, health and wellness, anddiversity, resulted in new CSR terminology (Smith & Alexander, 2013). This study will reveal that, in the relatively short time since 2011, CSR terminology has again shifted. Some of the commonly used terms, such as community, environment, and sustainability, have decreased in usage on websites. New website communications have arisen with terms such assupply chainandvolunteer involvement.

Effectively communicating CSR activities is vital to maintaining a positive corporate reputation, which has been linked to superior financial performance, lower cost of capital, and market value premium (Smith, Smith, & Wang, 2010). Criticism of, and even hostility toward, public corporations has been strong in the years following the 2011 study. Many people view corporate executives, especially the CEO, as having exorbitant salaries at the expense of the consumer. One way corporations may be combating this negative image is through company website communication regardingcorporate givingandphilanthropy, two terms that have appeared on company websites since the 2011 study. This is another example of the benefit from a current study that identifies how CSR terminology has changed in response to societal attitudes.

The current study helps fill the need for ongoing information regarding CSR content on company websites. Public opinion changes and evolves, along with the prominent social issues. Because of this changing environment, it is beneficial for companies to monitor their websites to determine if they are addressing the important social issues of the day. CSR is a fundamental ingredient of corporate communication because of its contribution to the perceived sincerity and reputation of a company (Verboven, 2011). Companies strive to show concern for matters that are important to society as a whole. CSR communication not only contributes to a company’s reputation but can also affect business operations.Porter and Kramer (2006)suggest there are potential value chain contributions of CSR. The value chain consists of steps performed by a company to create a product. At each step within the chain, some value is added to the product. With CSR in mind, there may be a possibility to affect a social issue through changing a business process within a step. For example, this study will show that the termhuman rightshas grown in usage. Within the supply channel, a company can make a positive impact on human rights by requiring its suppliers to maintain a certain standard of working conditions. By keeping a watch on social issues and a company’s CSR content, a manager can keep the two in accord.

Ongoing examination of company websites can also help managers stay abreast of what CSR terminology is being used by the majority of firms. Knowing this terminology may help a company effectively communicate its own CSR activities. Public awareness of a company’s participation in CSR seems to be typically low among consumers and stakeholders (Bhattacharya, Sen, & Korschun, 2008). One reason for this may be difficulty in comprehending this information from the company website. To facilitate communication and ensure that people correctly understand the CSR activities of an organization, it is helpful to use terminology that is commonly used in society. For example, the term environment has decreased in usage since 2011. Companies still care about the environment, but they are using different terms to better communicate this. Many companies have switched to using the termgreenbecause it is widely used and people equate it with being good for the environment (Smith & Brower, 2012).

This article compares the web content ofFortune500 companies in 2015 with content collected in 2011, specifically identifying terms related to CSR. Social responsibility applies to companies of any size; however, the emphasis tends to be on large organizations because they are more visible and have more resources (Carroll, 2010). Staying abreast of whatFortune500 companies are doing may be a means of keeping one’s finger on the pulse of CSR. The 4-year span of information in this study can be helpful to business practitioners and academics in identifying the emerging trends in CSR issues and the terminology used in connection with them. Since consumers and stakeholders use company websites as a source of information, communication can be more coherent if the same terminology is universally applied. For example, companies are currently using three different terms to communicate that company resources are being donated to various causes: philanthropy, corporate giving, and volunteer involvement. If companies merged these issues under one heading and uniformly used the term philanthropy, people could more easily navigate a company’s website, grasp company involvement with this issue, and even make comparisons between companies. Many consumers and investors actively compare companies to put their money into a company that is engaged in CSR (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2004;Blazovich & Smith, 2011).

Job seekers also use a company’s website as a source of information for comparing prospective employers. Using uniform terminology that is familiar to people can help companies effectively communicate the culture of their firm in relation to CSR. Companies concerned with CSR can positively influence potential employees. A company that is actively engaged with CSR programs is more attractive to job candidates, especially Millennials (Carroll, 2010;Kim & Park, 2011).

By looking atFortune500 websites, other companies can acquire the vocabulary to which people are being exposed. By incorporating terms that are familiar to one’s audience, communication is expedited. Besides business practitioners, educators can benefit from this article by equipping their students with the knowledge necessary to design websites that communicate CSR initiatives using terminology that is currently being used in the marketplace.

Literature Review

CSR seems to be an evolving concept with perpetual expansion (Blazovich & Smith, 2011;Hult, 2011;Lockett, Moon, & Visser, 2006;Luo & Bhattacharya, 2009). As previously stated, CSR is the integration of social and environmental issues within business operations and in dealings with stakeholders. This literature review will discuss the effect of CSR on consumers and the community, company employees, and stockholders. In addition, CSR as a competitive advantage will be discussed, which includes the impact of CSR on the financial status of a company.

Consumers and Community

Past studies have revealed that CSR affects consumer behavior in various ways. A person’s perception of a company is significantly affected by the company’s actions regarding social responsibility (Cobb, 2015). Besides the company as a whole, CSR influences a consumer’s perception of individual products (Pirsch, Gupta, & Grau, 2007). Overall customer satisfaction is influenced by a company’s CSR initiatives; this, in turn, leads to greater market value (Cheng, Ioannou, & Serafeim, 2014;Luo & Bhattacharya, 2006). One study revealed that increased awareness of a company’s CSR initiatives led to stronger customer loyalty (Marin, Ruiz, & Rubio, 2009).

Communicating CSR activities on a company website has the potential to positively influence consumer opinion of a company (de Bakker & den Hond, 2008). CSR involvement can positively influence sales because the majority of consumers would rather give their business to a company that is helping a charity or a local community project (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2004). Customer loyalty is also affected due to the fact that people are more loyal to companies practicing CSR; the customer identifies with the positive image of the company (Marin et al., 2009). With this in mind, companies that communicate their CSR involvement can attract customers and retain them.

CSR has become a criterion in consumer purchase decisions; it may be on the verge of becoming a requirement in today’s market (Hult, 2011). The bottom line is that consumers prefer doing business with a company that is actively helping people or the environment. One study showed that 25% to 35% of people consider the environmental impact when they make a purchasing decision (Nidumolu, Prahalad, & Rangaswami, 2009).

Since people are affected by CSR and often look to company websites to learn about these policies, properly communicating CSR policies is vital to maintaining good customer relations. Miscommunication of CSR policies can potentially lead to a negative public image. A company may appear insincere in its commitment to CSR if its policies are vague or unclear (Verboven, 2011). Thus, articulation of CSR policies is a major concern in corporate communication because of the subsequent impact on company reputation and sincerity.

Current and Future Employees

Another benefit of CSR revolves around the age-old problem of employee productivity. According toCarroll (2010), CSR initiatives can lead to an increase in employee satisfaction and productivity. Employees are also more likely to stay with a company that cares about social issues. This leads into another challenge for businesses, recruiting competent employees. Research reveals that companies concerned with CSR are more likely to draw the most qualified employees. One study found that CSR performance is positively related to employer desirability for candidates who have multiple job choices (Albinger & Freeman, 2000). Another study showed that a candidate’s perception of a company’s CSR initiatives contributes to the viability of the potential employer (Greening & Turban, 2000). Millennials are especially interested in a company’s commitment to social issues and regard CSR as a vital criterion in determining their preference in employer (Kim & Park, 2011). This generation tends to look for information online and will most likely visit a company’s website to gain a better understanding of the company’s operations and culture. Since a company’s CSR initiatives can be a factor in recruiting prospects, effectively communicating these initiatives on a website is imperative.

Stockholders, Competitiveness, and Financial Status

If companies are only accountable to their stockholders, then the sole responsibility of the firm is to increase profits and thus increase the wealth of their stockholders (Bebchuk, 2007;Stout, 2012). However, companies today are experiencing a wider range of responsibility as investors, consumers, and employees are considering more than profit as they evaluate company policy and strategies (Blazovich & Smith, 2011;Cronin, Smith, Gleim, Ramirez, & Martinez, 2011;Makni, Francoeur, & Bellavance, 2009). The triple bottom line in business refers to companies being concerned with making a profit while also helping people and the environment (Huang & Rust, 2011;Johnson, 2009). Having this mind-set may be a win-win scenario because CSR tends to build goodwill, thus helping secure future business partners and customers (Kher, 2005). As a result, stockholders also benefit. According to one study, policies regarding CSR can produce an insurance-like protection for improved stockholder wealth (Luo & Bhattacharya, 2009). If a company’s image is improved due to its CSR policies, then the value of its stock may increase (Porter & Kramer, 2006). It is especially important to correctly articulate CSR policies to stockholders. Stockholders want to know how CSR policies and programs are affecting business operations and strategic company metrics, such as customer relations and return on investment (DeKay, 2011;Du, Bhattacharya, & Sen, 2010).

A company can benefit from being a good corporate citizen if that attribute elevates the company above the competition. Active social responsibility programs tend to produce a competitive advantage for a company in the marketplace (Kassinis & Vafeas, 2006;King & Lenox, 2002). Consumers and investors tend to gravitate toward and support companies that are good corporate citizens (Carroll, 2010;Du et al., 2010;Porter & Kramer, 2006;Smith et al., 2010).

Companies with active social responsibility policies and programs tend to be in good financial standing (Ioannou & Serafeim, 2015;Kassinis & Vafeas, 2006;King & Lenox, 2002). However, there is also research that suggests the impact of CSR on a company’s financial performance is questionable (McWilliams & Siegel, 2001;Orlitzky, Schmidt, & Rynes, 2003;Ruf, Muralidhar, Brown, Janney, & Paul, 2001;Van de Velde, Vermeir, & Corten, 2005). Some researchers have stated that CSR has a negative impact on financial performance, due to the high costs incurred by the company (Wright & Ferris, 1997). While CSR initiatives may be expensive, they can also result in cost savings by reducing the amount of resources needed for customer relationship management (Wilson, 2010). Additional cost savings can come from incurring fewer regulatory problems (Carroll, 2010).

Definitions for the CSR terms discussed in this article can be found inTable 1. Most definitions are taken fromThe A to Z of Corporate Social Responsibility(Visser, Matten, Pohl, & Tolhurst, 2010). However, some terms are not contained within this source; thus, a definition from a business dictionary is used.

Table 1.

CSR Topics With Definitions.

Citizenship	Participating in the governance of society through social, environmental, and political activities (McIntosh, 2010).
Community	Conducting business, hiring, and investing in people to build a thriving community (Halley, 2010).
Corporate Giving	Financial donations.
Corporate Responsibility	The integration of social and environmental issues within business operations and dealings with stakeholders (European Commission, 2001).
Diversity	Nondiscrimination and inclusion of all people while providing equal opportunities (Grosser, 2010).
Environment	Waste management, pollution, ecological degradation, energy management, and conservation of natural resources (Wilson, 2010).
Ethics	Choices, circumstances, and actions that involve moral concerns regarding right and wrong (Crane & Matten, 2010).
Green	Having objectives or features that have a positive impact on the environment (Green, 2016).
Health and Wellness	Educational and organizational activities facilitating behavior that contributes to the health of employees and their families (Leipziger, 2010).
Human Rights	Basic rights of every individual, independent of race, sex, religion, political opinion, social status, or other characteristics (Robinson, 2010).
Philanthropy	An altruistic action for the good of society (Cohen, 2010).
Sourcing	The process of finding suppliers of goods or services (Sourcing, 2016).
Supply Chain	Social, ethical, labor, and environmental issues within the creation and delivery of products and services (Line & Woodhead, 2010).
Sustainability	Advancement that fulfills present needs without harming the ability of future generations to meet their needs (Visser et al., 2010).
Training and Education	Competencies that equip employees to handle social, ecological, and economic challenges that arise for them and the company (Pierce, 2010).
Volunteer Involvement	Employee involvement in social initiatives within the community (Muthuri, 2010).

Methodology and Research Questions

Some social issues have risen to prominence since the original website analysis in 2011. The most dramatic example is the public outcry over human rights violations around the globe. This has spurred companies to audit their supply chains more closely and to notify consumers regarding the precautions they are taking. These notifications have emerged as part of CSR content on company websites. As public sentiment changes, this study will show that CSR terminology has also altered. Some terms that were commonly seen on corporate websites in 2011 have decreased in usage, while other terms have emerged. These changes will be discussed within the findings of this article.

Data were collected from the same list ofFortune500 companies used in the 2011 study. The entire population ofFortune500 companies with websites was included. Data were collected in 2015 regarding the current status of this population. A content analysis of the company websites was conducted. Specifically, headings related to CSR issues were categorized and tabulated. For the purpose of this study, a heading is defined as a subject that has its own link within a company website. A heading that relates to a social issue is classified as a CSR heading. The majority of CSR headings was found within web pages related to investors or information about the company. For example, on the home page of the Coca-Cola website is a link titled “Sustainability.” This is a social issue with its own link; thus, sustainability was documented as a CSR heading for Coca-Cola. Also on the home page is a link titled “Giving Back.” This is a social issue with its own link; thus, it was documented as a CSR heading under the category “Corporate Giving.” Website headings that were virtually identical were grouped together, and the group was given the term that was most frequently used. In this case,giving backis used by only a handful of companies, but corporate giving is used by a fourth ofFortune500 companies. Continuing our example, the home page of Coca-Cola contains a link titled “Our Company.” On clicking that, a new page appears with several links embedded in it. Links that qualified as CSR headings included community,health, and human rights.

CSR headings for this study included both headings from the 2011 study and new headings that were found during the content analysis of current company websites. Headings that were used by less than 5% of the companies were not included in the analysis. For the purpose of this study, these headings were deemed inconsequential. A total of 16 CSR headings were included in the analysis and will be discussed in this article.

Some companies highlight employee benefits on their websites. Since employee benefits include indirect and noncash compensation paid to the employee and not to society as a whole, this issue was not considered a CSR issue within the parameters of this study. Another issue that affects only employees is safety in the workplace. Safety refers to safeguarding employees against injury. Since this does not affect society as a whole, safety was not considered a CSR issue for this study. The termemployee compensationwas included in the original study but was not incorporated into this study as a CSR issue. For this study only, the determination was made that compensation predominantly affects only the employee, not society as a whole, even though some view employee compensation as a societal issue. When comparing the 2 years, computations from the 2011 study were adjusted to exclude compensation.

Having stipulated the requirements for a term being included in this study, I formulated the following research questions.

Research Question 1:What terms related to CSR areFortune500 companies using now as compared with 2011?

In addition to examining theFortune500 companies as an unabridged set, companies were divided into industry classifications to determine if CSR issues differ by industry. This exploration is supported by prior research indicating that companies within different industries behave differently (King & Lenox, 2002;Lichtenstein et al., 2004). TheFortune500 companies were categorized into manufacturing, retailing, and service industries based on their industry listing (Fortune, 2011).tTests were used to determine if significant differences exist among industries with regard to the number and types of CSR issues on company websites. This leads to the second research question:

Research Question 2:Do manufacturing, retailing, and service companies focus on different CSR terms?

Findings

The results of this study show that 99% of theFortune500 companies with websites include a CSR heading on their site, which represents a 1% increase from 2011. The average number of CSR headings on aFortune500 website today is 6.4. This is a substantial increase from 2011, when the average number was 4.9 (Smith & Alexander, 2013).tTests reveal a significant difference (p< .01) in the number of CSR headings between 2011 and 2015.

CSR Terminology

In comparing the terms that are currently being used as CSR headings onFortune500 websites with those that were used in 2011, there have been shifts in website communication and some new terminology has appeared.Table 2displays the complete list of headings and the percentage of companies using them in 2015 and 2011, along with the change in usage between the years. Let us first examine the CSR terms that are currently being used by at least half of theFortune500 companies. These headings are listed at the top of the table. Community is still the most commonly used heading; however, it did experience a 12% drop in usage. In 2011, 82% of companies used the term community as a CSR heading; today it is used by 70% of companies. The term diversity increased in usage and is now the second most popular CSR heading.

Table 2.

Corporate Social Responsibility Headings onFortune500 Websites for 2015 and 2011.

Heading	Percentage of companies with heading		Change over 4-year period
Heading	2015	2011^a	Increase	Decrease
Community	70.5	82.7		12%
Diversity	62.8	59.8	3%
Environment	60.6	79.7		19%
Supply Chain	55.7	^b	50%+
Ethics	55.1	59.3		4%
Sustainability	51.8	62.4		11%
Corporate Responsibility	47.2	36.0	11%
Health and Wellness	41.5	62.6		21%
Volunteer Involvement	32.3	^b	27%+
Corporate Giving	27.8	^b	22%+
Philanthropy	27.6	^b	22%+
Training and Education	23.8	^b	18%+
Citizenship (Corporate or Global)	21.7	16.9	5%
Green	20.3	12.4	8%
Human Rights	17.3	^b	12%+
Sourcing	^b	19.1		19%

Source. Smith and Alexander (2013).^bLess than 5%.

The percentage can potentially be 5 points more, since the exact 2011 number is not given

Environment experienced a 19% drop in usage over the past 4 years. As shown inTable 2, it went from being used by 79% of companies to 60%. As will be discussed later in the article, the majority of companies are still concerned about the environment, but some are using different terminology, such as green.

Ethics has remained a fairly constant CSR heading. Slightly over half of the companies still make it a topic on their websites.

Supply chain is a CSR heading that has emerged since 2011. Currently, 55% of companies discuss supply chain issues on their websites, whereas in 2011, it was less than 5%. This, in part, represents a shift in terminology. In 2011, 19% of companies used the termsourcingas a CSR heading, while today it is used by less than 5%. However, since over half of the companies are now calling attention to their supply chains, this also represents a major shift in what companies are prioritizing in website communication.

The last CSR term that is used by at least half of theFortune500 companies is sustainability. It has experienced an 11% decrease in usage over the past 4 years, falling from 62% to 51%.

Now we will look at the CSR headings that are currently being used by less than half of theFortune500 companies. These headings are listed in the bottom part ofTable 2. Even though less than half (47%) of the companies use the termcorporate responsibility, it has experienced an 11% increase in usage since 2011. Traditionally, the term corporate responsibility is the equivalent of CSR, which refers to companies having responsibilities to society that extend beyond their obligations to stakeholders (Carroll, 2010).

A noteworthy change in CSR terminology is in the use of health and wellness as a website heading. In 2011, it was the third most used heading. Since then, usage has dropped by 34% and less than half of the companies currently have it as a CSR heading. The reasons for this will be discussed later.

As previously mentioned, there are fewer companies currently using the term community than there were in 2011. Increased usage of the following CSR terms implies a shift in terminology to communicate company contributions to the community: volunteer involvement, corporate giving, and philanthropy. Doing volunteer work is one way to help a community. The number of companies using the heading volunteer involvement has dramatically increased since 2011 and is now used by almost a third of companies. Instead of donating one’s time, companies may make financial donations. A fourth of the companies use the term corporate giving on their websites. A fourth of companies use the term philanthropy. These emerging terms (volunteer involvement, corporate giving, and philanthropy) were used by less than 5% of companies in 2011.

The termtraining and educationhas increased in usage, with almost a fourth of companies today using it as a CSR heading. This term was used by less than 5% of companies in 2011. Another term that has increased in usage over the past 4 years iscitizenship. As a CSR website heading, it has increased from 17% to 22%. For this study, citizenship included both corporate and global citizenship.

As mentioned earlier, there has been a shift in referring to environmental issues under the heading green. Twenty percent of companies now use the term green. While this may seem like a small number, the term is gaining some momentum with an 8% growth in usage since 2011. Another term that is emerging is human rights. Seventeen percent ofFortune500 companies currently have this as a CSR heading on their websites. A term that is connected to human rights ishuman trafficking. Currently, 3.5% of theFortune500 use human trafficking as a website heading. However, human trafficking was not included as a CSR heading in the calculations for this study because it fell below the 5% cutoff. Human rights, human trafficking, and their connection to company supply chains will be discussed later in the article.

Manufacturers, Retailers, and Service Companies

This section will present findings for the second research question, which pertains to whether manufacturing, retail, and service firms differ on CSR issues. As mentioned earlier, CSR headings on company websites have increased in number by 30% since 2011. Has each industry been affected equally?tTests reveal a significant difference (p< .01) between manufacturing and retail companies with regard to the average number of CSR headings contained in company websites. There is also a significant difference between manufacturing and service companies (p< .01). While there is less significant difference between retail companies and service companies (p< .10), this represents a change in the relationship since 2011. There was not a significant difference between retail and service companies in 2011. This change is the result of service companies significantly increasing their website communication regarding CSR issues.Table 3shows the average number of website headings by industry type for 2011 and 2015.

Table 3.

Average Number of Corporate Social Responsibility Headings on Company Websites per Industry for 2015 and 2011.

Industry	2015^a	2011^b
Manufacturing	7.5	5.7
Service	6.1	4.7
Retail	5.4	4.2
Average of all industries	6.4	4.9

tTests indicate a significant difference between manufacturers and retailers (p< .01) and between manufacturers and service firms (p< .01). There was less significant difference between retailers and service firms (p< .10).^b Source. Smith and Alexander (2013).

Emerging social concerns and public sentiment have influenced the three industries to make some shifts in their CSR terminology. Findings reveal that the three industries differ on the types of CSR issues included in their websites. Manufacturers use more CSR headings on their websites than do other industries. Manufacturers use an average of 7.5 CSR headings, whereas the average company website contains 6.4. The number of CSR headings on manufacturing websites has significantly (p< .01) increased since 2011, when the average was 5.7. This extensive coverage of CSR content suggests that manufacturing companies are very active in responding to societal concerns and communicating their policies regarding social responsibility.

As was common with theFortune500 as a whole, there has been a drop in the usage of the termenvironmentover the past 4 years. However, there has been an emergence of the term supply chain, with 74% of manufacturers including it on their websites. Previously, fewer than 5% used the term.

Community and diversity are CSR headings commonly used by manufacturers, with over 70% of companies using each. Over half of manufacturing firms use the headings corporate responsibility and health and wellness. Manufacturers are by far the biggest user of the website heading human rights. Manufacturing operations are especially susceptible to human rights violations.Table 4shows the complete usage of each CSR heading by industry.

Table 4.

CSR Headings onFortune500 Websites for 2015 and 2011 by Industry.

Heading	Percentage of companies with heading
	Manufacturing		Retail		Service
	2015^a	2011^b	2015^a	2011^b	2015^a	2011^b
Community	73.8	88.6	76.5	72.9	74.1	85.8
Diversity	71.6	66.3	58.5	47.1	63.9	61.8
Environment	77.0	94.6	48.5	70.0	57.4	75.1
Supply Chain	74.3	—	45.6	—	49.5	—
Ethics	68.3	67.9	52.9	64.3	50.9	54.2
Sustainability	72.7	78.8	44.1	45.7	42.6	57.8
Corporate Responsibility	56.3	47.3	42.6	27.1	46.3	31.6
Health and Wellness	59.0	77.2	27.9	50.0	35.6	58.2
Volunteer Involvement	37.7	—	19.1	—	35.6	—
Corporate Giving	25.7	—	30.9	—	31.9	—
Philanthropy	29.0	—	22.1	—	31.5	—
Training and Education	32.2	—	16.2	—	21.8	—
Citizenship (Corporate or Global)	26.2	21.2	14.7	7.1	22.7	17.3
Green	16.4	7.6	22.1	14.3	25.5	16.4
Human Rights	29.5	—	7.4	—	12.0	—
Sourcing	3.8	23.4	10.3	25.7	3.7	14.7

tTests indicate a significant difference between manufacturers and retailers (p< .01) and between manufacturers and service firms (p< .01). There was a significant difference between retailers and service firms (p< .1).^b Source. Smith and Alexander (2013).

Service companies focus on fewer CSR issues than do manufacturers; they average 6.1 CSR headings on their websites. However, this is significantly (p< .01) more than in 2011, when the average was 4.7. This industry experienced a major change in their CSR website communication. As shown inTable 2, the majority of CSR headings underwent a noticeable alteration in usage, either increase or decrease. A major shift occurred in reducing the use of health and wellness while increasing their focus on terms related to corporate giving, philanthropy, and volunteerism. Community and diversity are the most commonly used CSR headings for service companies. Following suit withFortune500 companies as a whole, service companies have shifted away from using the term environment to more frequently using the term supply chain.

Retailers use the fewest CSR headings: 5.4 on average. This is a significant (p= .01) increase from over 4 years ago when the average was 4.2. Community is still the most commonly used heading. Over half of retailers include the headings diversity and environment on their websites. The term ethics is also used by half of the retailers. Noticeable changes in retailer websites include increased usage of the headings corporate responsibility and green. Retailer websites are primarily communicating with the ultimate consumer, and these terms may resonate with them.

Discussion

In this article, we examine the ways in which CSR-related web content ofFortune500 companies has changed since 2011. Findings reveal that the average number of CSR headings on a company website has increased by 30%. New terms have emerged in response to growing concerns over issues such as human rights. Some traditional terminology has been replaced by new terms that are currently used in society. This suggests an effort on the part of companies to make their communication more transparent and easier to understand.

One of the most interesting findings in this study is the emergence of a new CSR heading on company websites, namely supply chain. As shown inTable 2, this term has experienced widespread use since 2011, with 55% of companies using supply chain as a website heading. Traditionally, supply chain refers to the various interconnected firms involved in creating and delivering a product or service. However, in relation to CSR, the definition of supply chain has broadened to include social, ethical, and labor issues. One reason that supply chain is used by half of theFortune500 companies may be the growing concern over human rights within a company’s supply chain. Companies are responding by investigating their supply chains for human rights violations such as child labor and forced labor. The California Transparency in Supply Chains Act, which took effect in January 2012, has prompted some companies to include supply chain as a subject heading on their websites. This act requires companies, with annual revenues over $100 million, to disclose information on their websites pertaining to their strategies to prevent human exploitation, notably human trafficking, from occurring within their supply chain (Linnhoff et al., 2014;Smith & Betts, 2015). Consumers and stakeholders can help hold a company accountable for human rights within its supply chain (Line & Woodhead, 2010).

Another response to public concern over human rights is the development of the term human rights as a CSR heading. Human rights refer to the basic rights of every individual, independent of race, sex, religion, political opinion, social status, or any other characteristic (Robinson, 2010). A term often associated with human rights today is human trafficking. With less than 5% of companies using this term as a website heading, it has yet to be seen whether human trafficking will become a prevalent CSR heading. Human trafficking includes the recruitment, transport, or receipt of persons by coercion or deception for the purpose of exploitation. As human trafficking gains attention around the world, companies are awakening to their responsibility to monitor their supply chains. Manufacturers and retailers could inadvertently be sustaining human trafficking by using products or services produced by victims of forced labor (Smith & Betts, 2015). If company operations are not carried out in a responsible manner, they can have negative repercussions on the basic rights of human beings. A growing number of companies agree that the private sector should help ensure respect for human rights around the world and are committing to incorporating human rights policies within their operations (Robinson, 2010;Smith, Martin, & Smith, 2014).

The triple bottom line in business refers to companies being concerned with making a profit, while also helping people and the environment (Huang & Rust, 2011;Johnson, 2009). Companies have previously used the heading community to communicate their intention to help the local community. Since 2011, the number of companies using the heading community has fallen by 12%. This does not mean that companies are not investing in society, but rather there has simply been a shift toward using terms that are more specific in communicating what is being done for the community, such as volunteer involvement. Companies find it helpful to phrase CSR initiatives in terms that are of interest to stakeholders (DeKay, 2011). Almost a third of companies are including descriptions of employee participation in volunteerism. Volunteerism is an effort by firms to encourage their employees’ involvement in social causes within the local community. Volunteering has been shown to strengthen stakeholder relationships and build company-community relationships (Muthuri, 2010). Companies have become more strategic in supporting volunteering by linking employees with community needs.

Two more terms have emerged that may take the place of community: corporate giving and philanthropy. Both of these terms have increased as CSR headings on company websites since 2011. Philanthropy produces goodwill within a community and instills a feeling of pride within employees and stakeholders of the company (Cohen, 2010).

The majority of firms still use the heading environment, even though usage of the term has decreased by 19% since 2011. Environmental matters include waste management, pollution, ecological degradation, energy management, and conservation of natural resources (Wilson, 2010). While the decrease in usage gives the impression that companies are less concerned about the environment, in reality they are simply using different terminology. A challenge facing companies today is how to communicate the fact that their business operations are sustainable or that the company cares about the environment. Many firms go to great lengths to protect the environment, yet people are unaware of this effort because the firm has not effectively communicated (Bentley University, 2008;Smith & Brower, 2012). Many companies are now using terms commonly used in society, such as green and citizenship. Usage of green as a CSR heading on websites grew by 8% since 2011. This term is more familiar and, thus, may resonate better with people. According to one study, using the term green is very effective when companies want to communicate to Millennials that they care about the environment. The term green is part of a Millennials’ schema for environmentally conscious products or brands (Smith & Brower, 2012). Research has shown that environmentally friendly companies have just as good financial performance and possibly lower risk than other companies (Blazovich, Smith, & Smith, 2013).

The term citizenship is also used in relation to environmental issues and sustainable development (McIntosh, 2010). Usage of citizenship as a CSR heading has grown by 5%. In addition to environmental issues, citizenship is used to refer to a company acting as a member of society in the areas of social and political activities. As the world becomes more interconnected with the help of new technologies, companies are realizing the ripple effect that their actions have on society, both locally and globally. Thus, through strategic corporate citizenship, business can be part of making the world a better place. For a majority of Americans, corporate citizenship is a factor in deciding whether to do business with a company (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2004). Good corporate citizenship is associated with improved stock market valuation (Blazovich & Smith, 2011). With this in mind, corporate citizenship has the potential to become a mandate for corporations (Hult, 2011).

As the marketplace is becoming global and more diverse, having a workforce that is representative of that diversity is generally beneficial from a public perception standpoint but also with regard to financial performance. For example, research has shown that gender diversity is associated with better financial performance (Blazovich, Smith, & Smith, 2014).Grosser (2010)found that stakeholders are interested in whether companies are effectively using the diverse skills of their employees. Diversity has remained an important CSR heading. Diversity promotes nondiscrimination and the inclusion of all people while providing equal opportunities (Grosser, 2010). While diversity among employees is the most common focus for companies, diversity can also apply to suppliers, board members, and other stakeholders. The term has expanded to include different skill sets and experiences; these contribute to successful innovations within a company.

Research shows that current and potential employees are interested in a company’s CSR. Not only can companies attract better employees but current employees will have a better perception of the company if CSR policies are clear (Albinger & Freeman, 2000;Greening & Turban, 2000). Along these lines, companies seem to be using terminology that addresses specific issues related to their employees, such as employee benefits, safety, and training and education. The term traditionally found on company websites, health and wellness, has decreased in usage by 33%. Health and wellness includes educational and organizational activities facilitating behavior that contributes to the health of employees and their families. Previously, education has been given low priority within CSR endeavors, partly due to the difficulty in measuring whether it is beneficial to the organization (Pierce, 2010). This seems to be changing, since almost a fourth of companies now include the heading training and education on their websites. In a CSR framework, training and education impart new competencies that equip employees to handle social, ecological, and economic challenges that arise for themselves and the company (Pierce, 2010). Formal training is just one way to support an employee’s educational process.

This study is poised to make several contributions to theory and practice regarding CSR. The fact that companies are including more CSR headings on their websites shows that companies support the theory of CSR being important to consumers, employees, and other stakeholders. People look to company websites to gather information about the company and then use this information in their decision-making. A company’s CSR activities can influence purchase decisions and company reputation (Hult, 2011;Verboven, 2011). Company reputation, in turn, affects consumer and stockholder behavior. Thus, companies are aware of the importance of effective website communication regarding their CSR policies and programs. This article equips practitioners with the knowledge of CSR terminology that is being used on company websites.

Conclusion

This article compares the terms that are currently being used as CSR headings onFortune500 websites with those that were used in 2011. Public opinion changes and evolves, along with the prominent issues. Some social issues have risen to prominence since the original website analysis in 2011. Findings reveal changes in website communication and the emergence of some new CSR terms. It is advantageous to examineFortune500 websites in order to identify the vocabulary to which people are being exposed. Companies should monitor their CSR website content to determine if they are addressing the important social issues of the day. The 4-year span of information in this study can be helpful to business practitioners and academicians in identifying the emerging trends in CSR issues and the terminology used in connection with them.

Today, 99% of theFortune500 companies participate in CSR. These companies must choose which social issues they will focus on, since there are numerous possibilities. This research shows additional social issues are emerging, such as human exploitation within company supply chains, global citizenship, volunteerism, and employee training. In response, companies have increased the number of social issues in which they engage. The average number of CSR-related headings on aFortune500 website today is 6.4, which represents a 30% increase since 2011.

To facilitate communication and ensure that people correctly understand the CSR activities of an organization, it is helpful to use terminology that is commonly used in society. For instance, the website heading environment has decreased in usage since 2011. Companies still care about the environment, but they are using different terms to better communicate this. Some companies have switched to the term green because it is widely used and people equate it with being good for the environment. Fewer companies are using the heading community today. Increased usage of the CSR terms volunteer involvement, corporate giving, and philanthropy implies a shift in terminology to communicate company contributions to the community.

A notable finding in this study is the emergence of a new CSR heading on company websites, namely supply chain. One reason that supply chain is used by half of theFortune500 companies may be the growing concern over human rights within a company’s supply chain. The California Transparency in Supply Chains Act, which took effect in January 2012, has prompted some companies to include supply chain as a subject heading on their websites.

This article offers insights into website content that can prove useful to business practitioners in designing websites that effectively communicate a company’s CSR. Benefits of instituting social responsibility policies and programs can include increased customer loyalty, attracting and retaining competent employees, and differentiating a company from its competitors. Since public awareness of a company’s CSR initiatives is typically low, ongoing improvement and updating of web content is beneficial to articulate CSR initiatives. This information can be helpful in teaching business and professional communication by educating future business people regarding the CSR terminology that is commonly used on corporate websites. Website communication can be more coherent if the same terminology is universally applied. This article can also help inform students regarding the prominent social issues of the day. Since the majority of companies are involved in CSR activities, no matter what industry or line of work, having knowledge of prominent CSR terminology and issues can be helpful on the job. This knowledge is helpful if the student is asked to contribute to website content, or if he or she is asked to pick a social issue to become involved with. A third of the company websites in the study highlighted employee volunteerism. Companies have become more strategic in supporting volunteering by linking employees with social causes. Thus, a future can be better prepared for this obligation by being preacquainted with the prominent social causes.

Limitations and Future Research

This study is limited to comparisons withFortune500 company websites in 2011 because that is the premise and date of the initial study (Smith & Alexander, 2013). A future research study could examine the basic language of CSR as it was years ago and compare that with CSR terminology today. Findings in this article discuss CSR-related terminology found solely on company websites. An ensuing study could examine other marketing communication in which CSR terminology is used, such as press releases and advertisements. With companies using social media as a way to communicate with consumers and stakeholders, there could be an analysis of corporate Twitter feeds, Facebook pages, and company blogs.

Several notable shifts in CSR terminology were found in this study, and plausible explanations were surmised from secondary information regarding current social concerns and human behavior. More detailed explanations could be gleaned through primary contact with company management.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Biography

Katherine Taken Smithis an assistant professor of marketing at Murray State University. Her research interest focuses on digital marketing and corporate social responsibility.

References

Albinger

H. S.

Freeman

S. J.

(2000).Corporate social performance and attractiveness as an employer to different job seeking populations.Journal of Business Ethics,28,243-253.

Bebchuk

L. A.

(2007).The myth of the shareholder franchise.Virginia Law Review,93,675-732.

Bentley University. (2008).Going green for Generation Y: New Bentley College study reveals perception is key to attracting young consumers. Retrieved fromhttp://www.bentley.edu/newsroom/latest-headlines/going-green-generation-y-new-bentley-college-study-reveals-perception-key

Bhattacharya

C. B.

Sen

(2004).Doing better at doing good: When, why, and how consumers respond to corporate social initiatives.California Management Review,47(1),9-24.

Bhattacharya

C. B.

Sen

Korschun

(2008).Using corporate social responsibility to win the war for talent.MIT Sloan Management Review,49,37-44.

Blazovich

J. L.

Smith

K. T.

Smith

L. M.

(2013).An examination of financial performance and risk of environmentally friendly “green” companies.Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues,16(1),121-134.

Blazovich

J. L.

Smith

K. T.

Smith

L. M.

(2014).Employee-friendly companies and work-life balance: Is there an impact on financial performance and risk level? Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict,18(2),1-13.

Blazovich

J. L.

Smith

L. M.

(2011).Ethical corporate citizenship: Does it pay? Research on Professional Responsibility and Ethics in Accounting,15,127-163.

Carroll

A. B.

(2010).Corporate social responsibility. In Visser

Matten

Pohl

Tolhurst

(Eds.),The A to Z of corporate social responsibility(Rev. and updated ed., pp.106-113).West Sussex, England:Wiley.

10.

Cheng

Ioannou

Serafeim

(2014).Corporate social responsibility and access to finance.Strategic Management Journal,35,1-23.

11.

Cobb

J. A.

(2015).Risky business: The decline of defined benefit pensions and firms’ shifting of risk.Organization Science,26,1332-1350.

12.

Cohen

(2010).Philanthropy. In Visser

Matten

Pohl

Tolhurst

(Eds.),The A to Z of corporate social responsibility(Rev. and updated ed., pp.315-316).West Sussex, England:Wiley.

13.

Crane

Matten

(2010).Business ethics. In Visser

Matten

Pohl

Tolhurst

(Eds.),The A to Z of corporate social responsibility(Rev. and updated ed., pp.45-51).West Sussex, England:Wiley.

14.

Cronin

J. J.

Jr. Smith

J. S.

Gleim

M. R.

Ramirez

Martinez

J. D.

(2011).Green marketing strategies: An examination of stakeholders and the opportunities they present.Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,39,158-174.

15.

de Bakker

F. G. A.

den Hond

. (2008).Activists’ influence tactics and corporate policies.Business Communication Quarterly,71,107-111.

16.

DeKay

S. H.

(2011).When doing what’s right becomes messy.Business Communication Quarterly,74,412-414.

17.

Bhattacharya

C. B.

Sen

(2010).Maximizing business returns to corporate social responsibility (CSR): The role of CSR communication.International Journal of Management Reviews,12,8-19.

18.

Esrock

S. L.

Leichty

G. B.

(1998).Social responsibility and corporate web pages: Self-presentation or agenda-setting? Public Relations Review,24,305-319.

19.

European Commission. (2001).Green paper: Promoting a European framework for corporate social responsibilities(COM[2001] 366 final). Retrieved fromhttp://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/committees/deve/20020122/com(2001)366_en.pdf

20.

Fortune. (2011).Fortune 500. 2011. Retrieved fromhttp://fortune.com/fortune500/2011/

21.

Green. (2016).In Business dictionary. Retrieved fromhttp://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/green.html

22.

Greening

D. W.

Turban

D. B.

(2000).Corporate social performance as a competitive advantage in attracting a quality workforce.Business & Society,39,254-280.

23.

Grosser

(2010).Diversity. In Visser

Matten

Pohl

Tolhurst

(Eds.),The A to Z of corporate social responsibility(Rev. and updated ed., pp.138-140).West Sussex, England:Wiley.

24.

Halley

(2010).Community development. In Visser

Matten

Pohl

Tolhurst

(Eds.),The A to Z of corporate social responsibility(Rev. and updated ed., pp.76-77).West Sussex, England:Wiley.

25.

Huang

M.-H.

Rust

R. T.

(2011).Sustainability and consumption.Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,39,40-54.

26.

Hult

G. T. M.

(2011).Market-focused sustainability: Market orientation plus! Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,39,1-6.

27.

Ioannou

Serafeim

(2015).The impact of corporate social responsibility on investment recommendations: Analysts’ perceptions and shifting institutional logics.Strategic Management Journal,36,1053-1081.

28.

Johnson

R. L.

(2009).Organizational motivations for going green or profitability versus sustainability.Business Review,13(1),22-28.

29.

Kassinis

Vafeas

(2006).Stakeholder pressures and environmental performance.Academy of Management Journal,49,145-159.

30.

Kher

(2005,December 12).Getting smart at being good: Are companies better off for it? Time Magazine. Retrieved fromwww.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1139825,00.html

31.

Kim

S.-Y.

Park

(2011).Corporate social responsibility as an organizational attractiveness for prospective public relations practitioners.Journal of Business Ethics,103,639-653.

32.

King

Lenox

M. J.

(2002).Exploring the locus of profitable pollution reduction.Management Science,48,289-299.

33.

Leipziger

(2010).Health and safety. In Visser

Matten

Pohl

Tolhurst

(Eds.),The A to Z of corporate social responsibility(Rev. and updated ed., pp.216-221).West Sussex, England:Wiley.

34.

Lichtenstein

D. R.

Drumwright

M. E.

Braig

B. M.

(2004).The effect of corporate social responsibility on consumer donations to corporate-supported nonprofits.Journal of Marketing,68(4),16-32.

35.

Line

Woodhead

(2010).Supply chain. In Visser

Matten

Pohl

Tolhurst

(Eds.),The A to Z of corporate social responsibility(Rev. and updated ed., pp.382-384).West Sussex, England:Wiley.

36.

Linnhoff

Martin

H. M.

Smith

K. T.

Smith

L. M.

(2014).A descriptive analysis of ethics codes, CSR, and efforts to combat human trafficking.International Journal of Corporate Governance,5,156-177.

37.

Lockett

Moon

Visser

(2006).Corporate social responsibility in management research: Focus, nature, salience and sources of influence.Journal of Management Studies,43,115-136.

38.

Luo

Bhattacharya

C. B.

(2006).Corporate social responsibility, customer satisfaction, and market value.Journal of Marketing,70(4),1-18.

39.

Luo

Bhattacharya

C. B.

(2009).The debate over doing good: Corporate social performance, strategic marketing levers, and firm idiosyncratic risk.Journal of Marketing,73(6),198-213.

40.

Makni

Francoeur

Bellavance

(2009).Causality between corporate social performance and financial performance: Evidence from Canadian firms.Journal of Business Ethics,89,409-422.

41.

Marin

Ruiz

Rubio

(2009).The role of identity salience in the effects of corporate social responsibility on consumer behavior.Journal of Business Ethics,84,65-78.

42.

McIntosh

(2010).Corporate citizenship. In Visser

Matten

Pohl

Tolhurst

(Eds.),The A to Z of corporate social responsibility(Rev. and updated ed., pp.85-89).West Sussex, England:Wiley.

43.

McWilliams

Siegel

(2001).Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective.Academy of Management Review,26,117-127.

44.

Muthuri

(2010).Volunteering. In Visser

Matten

Pohl

Tolhurst

(Eds.),The A to Z of corporate social responsibility(Rev. and updated ed., pp.425-427).West Sussex, England:Wiley.

45.

Nidumolu

Prahalad

C. K.

Rangaswami

M. R.

(2009).Why sustainability is now the key driver of innovation.Harvard Business Review,87,57-64.

46.

Orlitzky

Schmidt

F. L.

Rynes

S. L.

(2003).Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis.Organization Studies,24,403-441.

47.

Pierce

(2010).Learning. In Visser

Matten

Pohl

Tolhurst

(Eds.),The A to Z of corporate social responsibility(Rev. and updated ed., pp.268-269).West Sussex, England:Wiley.

48.

Pirsch

Gupta

Grau

S. L.

(2007).A framework for understanding corporate social responsibility programs as a continuum: An exploratory study.Journal of Business Ethics,70,125-140.

49.

Porter

M. E.

Kramer

M. R.

(2006).Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility.Harvard Business Review,84(12),78-92.

50.

Prothero

McDonagh

(1992).Producing environmentally acceptable cosmetics? The impact of environmentalism on the United Kingdom cosmetics and toiletries industry.Journal of Marketing Management,8,147-166.

51.

Robinson

(2010).Human rights. In Visser

Matten

Pohl

Tolhurst

(Eds.),The A to Z of corporate social responsibility(Rev. and updated ed., p. 223).West Sussex, England:Wiley.

52.

Ruf

B. M.

Muralidhar

Brown

R. M.

Janney

J. J.

Paul

(2001).An empirical investigation of the relationship between change in corporate social performance and financial performance: A stakeholder theory perspective.Journaol of Business Ethics,32,143-156.

53.

Smith

K. T.

Alexander

J. J.

(2013).Which CSR-related headings doFortune500 companies use on their websites? Business Communication Quarterly,76,155-171.

54.

Smith

K. T.

Betts

(2015).Your company may unwittingly be conducting business with human traffickers: How can you prevent this? Business Horizons,58,225-234.

55.

Smith

K. T.

Brower

T. R.

(2012).Longitudinal study of green marketing strategies that influence Millennials.Journal of Strategic Marketing,20,535-551.

56.

Smith

K. T.

Martin

H. M.

Smith

L. M.

(2014).Human trafficking: A global multi-billion dollar criminal industry.International Journal of Public Law and Policy,4,293-308.

57.

Smith

K. T.

Smith

L. M.

Wang

(2010).Does brand management of corporate reputation translate into higher market value? Journal of Strategic Marketing,18,201-221.

58.

Sourcing. (2016). InBusiness dictionary. Retrieved fromhttp://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/sourcing.html

59.

Stout

L. A

. (2012).New thinking on “shareholder primacy.” Accounting, Economics, and Law,2(2). Retrieved fromhttps://www.degruyter.com/downloadpdf/j/ael.2012.2.issue-2/2152-2820.1037/2152-2820.1037.xml

60.

Van

Velde

Vermeir

Corten

(2005).Corporate social responsibility and financial performance.Corporate Governance,5,129-138.

61.

Verboven

(2011).Communicating CSR and business identity in the chemical industry through mission slogans.Business Communication Quarterly,74,415-431.

62.

Visser

Matten

Pohl

Tolhurst

(Eds.). (2010).The A to Z of corporate social responsibility(Rev. and updated ed.).West Sussex, England:Wiley.

63.

Wilson

(2010).Environment. In Visser

Matten

Pohl

Tolhurst

(Eds.),The A to Z of corporate social responsibility(Rev. and updated ed., pp.156-159).West Sussex, England:Wiley.

64.

Wright

Ferris

S. P.

(1997).Agency conflict and corporate strategy: The effect of divestment on corporate value.Strategic Management Journal,18,77-83.

65.

Wry

Cobb

J. A.

Aldrich

H. E.

(2013).More than a metaphor: Assessing the historical legacy of resource dependence and its contemporary promise as a theory of environmental complexity.Academy of Management Annals,7,441-488.