Does financial distress suppress CSR gap? The moderating effect of state ownership and market competition

IF 3.6 2区 哲学 Q2 BUSINESS
Xianyi Long, Qinwei Cao
{"title":"Does financial distress suppress CSR gap? The moderating effect of state ownership and market competition","authors":"Xianyi Long,&nbsp;Qinwei Cao","doi":"10.1111/beer.12693","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Companies will prioritize external corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices over internal ones, a phenomenon known as the corporate social responsibility gap (CSR gap). Previous studies have mostly focused on its consequences, little is known about its antecedents. We argue that such practice is illegitimate because it goes against stakeholder expectation that primary stakeholders' interests should be prioritized, but it also has potential to gain differentiation benefit for intense investment on external CSR. Drawing on compensatory orchestration logic and the three types of firm legitimacy, we argue that firms that have gained high pragmatic legitimacy are more likely to engage in morally illegitimate but differentiation gaining activities such as CSR gap. Using financial distress to indicate low pragmatic legitimacy, we predict that distressed firms are inclined to practice low CSR gap. Considering the competing logics in China, we further argue that this negative relationship will be less pronounced if firms are state-owned or operating in a competitive industry. Using Chinese listed firms from 2010 to 2019 as an empirical sample, the results provide support for our arguments.</p>","PeriodicalId":29886,"journal":{"name":"Business Ethics the Environment & Responsibility","volume":"34 3","pages":"989-1008"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Business Ethics the Environment & Responsibility","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/beer.12693","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Companies will prioritize external corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices over internal ones, a phenomenon known as the corporate social responsibility gap (CSR gap). Previous studies have mostly focused on its consequences, little is known about its antecedents. We argue that such practice is illegitimate because it goes against stakeholder expectation that primary stakeholders' interests should be prioritized, but it also has potential to gain differentiation benefit for intense investment on external CSR. Drawing on compensatory orchestration logic and the three types of firm legitimacy, we argue that firms that have gained high pragmatic legitimacy are more likely to engage in morally illegitimate but differentiation gaining activities such as CSR gap. Using financial distress to indicate low pragmatic legitimacy, we predict that distressed firms are inclined to practice low CSR gap. Considering the competing logics in China, we further argue that this negative relationship will be less pronounced if firms are state-owned or operating in a competitive industry. Using Chinese listed firms from 2010 to 2019 as an empirical sample, the results provide support for our arguments.

财务困境会抑制企业社会责任差距吗?国有制和市场竞争的调节作用
公司将外部企业社会责任(CSR)实践置于内部实践之上,这种现象被称为企业社会责任差距(CSR gap)。以往的研究大多关注其后果,对其前因后果知之甚少。我们认为,这种做法是不正当的,因为它违背了利益相关者关于优先考虑主要利益相关者利益的期望,但它也有可能通过对外部企业社会责任的密集投资获得差异化利益。借鉴补偿性协调逻辑和企业合法性的三种类型,我们认为,获得高实用合法性的企业更有可能从事道德上不合法但却能获得差异化利益的活动,如企业社会责任差距。用财务困境来表示低实用主义合法性,我们预测陷入困境的企业倾向于实施低企业社会责任差距。考虑到中国的竞争逻辑,我们进一步认为,如果企业是国有企业或在竞争性行业中运营,这种负面关系就不会那么明显。以 2010 年至 2019 年的中国上市公司为实证样本,结果为我们的论点提供了支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
19.00%
发文量
86
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信