{"title":"Governing the Responsible Investment of Slack Resources in Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Performance: How Beneficial are CSR Committees?","authors":"Tim Heubeck, Annina Ahrens","doi":"10.1007/s10551-024-05798-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Possessing slack resources enables businesses to invest in innovative and stakeholder-focused initiatives. Therefore, we posit that higher slack resources encourage businesses to allocate these resources to improve their environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance. Moreover, as a central sustainability governance mechanism, we hypothesize that the corporate social responsibility (CSR) committee supports investing slack resources in ESG initiatives. Using data from Nasdaq-100 firms, we find initial support for a positive effect of slack resources for ESG. However, further analyses reveal that slack resources become detrimental to ESG after an economically relevant threshold, indicating an inverted U-shaped effect of slack resources. Additionally, despite their generally positive effect, we uncover that CSR committees cannot effectively enhance the benefits of low or moderate slack levels for ESG nor prevent the detriments of elevated slack levels for ESG. Therefore, our study significantly contributes to the ongoing discourse surrounding slack resources, ESG, and the usefulness of CSR committees. These findings hold significant implications for ethical resource allocation, urging firms and their decision-makers to reconsider the dual-edged role of slack resources in the unique ESG context and support the CSR committee in realizing its potential for promoting sustainability and ethical practices within the organization.</p>","PeriodicalId":15279,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Business Ethics","volume":"188 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Business Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-024-05798-6","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Possessing slack resources enables businesses to invest in innovative and stakeholder-focused initiatives. Therefore, we posit that higher slack resources encourage businesses to allocate these resources to improve their environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance. Moreover, as a central sustainability governance mechanism, we hypothesize that the corporate social responsibility (CSR) committee supports investing slack resources in ESG initiatives. Using data from Nasdaq-100 firms, we find initial support for a positive effect of slack resources for ESG. However, further analyses reveal that slack resources become detrimental to ESG after an economically relevant threshold, indicating an inverted U-shaped effect of slack resources. Additionally, despite their generally positive effect, we uncover that CSR committees cannot effectively enhance the benefits of low or moderate slack levels for ESG nor prevent the detriments of elevated slack levels for ESG. Therefore, our study significantly contributes to the ongoing discourse surrounding slack resources, ESG, and the usefulness of CSR committees. These findings hold significant implications for ethical resource allocation, urging firms and their decision-makers to reconsider the dual-edged role of slack resources in the unique ESG context and support the CSR committee in realizing its potential for promoting sustainability and ethical practices within the organization.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Business Ethics publishes only original articles from a wide variety of methodological and disciplinary perspectives concerning ethical issues related to business that bring something new or unique to the discourse in their field. Since its initiation in 1980, the editors have encouraged the broadest possible scope. The term `business'' is understood in a wide sense to include all systems involved in the exchange of goods and services, while `ethics'' is circumscribed as all human action aimed at securing a good life. Systems of production, consumption, marketing, advertising, social and economic accounting, labour relations, public relations and organisational behaviour are analysed from a moral viewpoint. The style and level of dialogue involve all who are interested in business ethics - the business community, universities, government agencies and consumer groups. Speculative philosophy as well as reports of empirical research are welcomed. In order to promote a dialogue between the various interested groups as much as possible, papers are presented in a style relatively free of specialist jargon.