Do Old Board Directors Promote Corporate Social Responsibility?

IF 5.9 1区 哲学 Q1 BUSINESS Journal of Business Ethics Pub Date : 2024-05-07 DOI:10.1007/s10551-024-05681-4
Han-Hsing Lee, Woan-lih Liang, Quynh-Nhu Tran, Quang-Thai Truong
{"title":"Do Old Board Directors Promote Corporate Social Responsibility?","authors":"Han-Hsing Lee, Woan-lih Liang, Quynh-Nhu Tran, Quang-Thai Truong","doi":"10.1007/s10551-024-05681-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study investigates the influence of old directors on corporate social responsibility (CSR) using roughly 25,000 firm-year observations from 2001 to 2015 in the United States. We employ the widely used selection, optimization, and compensation (SOC) model from psychology to explain the CSR decisions of old directors. Our results indicate that firms with a higher percentage of old directors tend to have lower engagement in CSR activities. To address endogeneity, we adopt the difference-in-differences method and use the event of sudden deaths and unexpected retirements of old directors and find that our results remain robust. Our analysis also reveals that the negative impact of old directors on CSR is more significant in firms where directors receive fewer reputational spillover benefits from CSR initiatives and/or firms exhibiting poor corporate governance. In addition, this adverse impact of old directors comes from two effects: a reduction in efforts to enhance CSR strengths and an increase in inaction to address CSR concerns. Overall, these findings suggest that the CSR decision-making process of old directors involves assessing the costs and benefits of CSR engagements, consistent with our hypothesis derived from the SOC model.</p>","PeriodicalId":15279,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Business Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-07","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/s10551-024-05681-4","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

This study investigates the influence of old directors on corporate social responsibility (CSR) using roughly 25,000 firm-year observations from 2001 to 2015 in the United States. We employ the widely used selection, optimization, and compensation (SOC) model from psychology to explain the CSR decisions of old directors. Our results indicate that firms with a higher percentage of old directors tend to have lower engagement in CSR activities. To address endogeneity, we adopt the difference-in-differences method and use the event of sudden deaths and unexpected retirements of old directors and find that our results remain robust. Our analysis also reveals that the negative impact of old directors on CSR is more significant in firms where directors receive fewer reputational spillover benefits from CSR initiatives and/or firms exhibiting poor corporate governance. In addition, this adverse impact of old directors comes from two effects: a reduction in efforts to enhance CSR strengths and an increase in inaction to address CSR concerns. Overall, these findings suggest that the CSR decision-making process of old directors involves assessing the costs and benefits of CSR engagements, consistent with our hypothesis derived from the SOC model.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
老董事会董事会促进企业社会责任吗?
本研究利用 2001 年至 2015 年美国约 25,000 个公司年的观测数据,调查了老董事对企业社会责任(CSR)的影响。我们采用心理学中广泛使用的选择、优化和补偿(SOC)模型来解释老董事的企业社会责任决策。我们的研究结果表明,老董事比例较高的公司参与企业社会责任活动的程度往往较低。为了解决内生性问题,我们采用了差分法,并使用了老董事突然死亡和意外退休的事件,发现我们的结果仍然稳健。我们的分析还显示,在董事从企业社会责任活动中获得的声誉溢出效益较少的公司和/或公司治理较差的公司中,老董事对企业社会责任的负面影响更为显著。此外,老董事的负面影响还来自两个方面:一是减少提升企业社会责任优势的努力,二是增加解决企业社会责任问题的不作为。总之,这些研究结果表明,老董事的企业社会责任决策过程涉及评估企业社会责任参与的成本和收益,这与我们从 SOC 模型中得出的假设是一致的。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.80
自引率
9.80%
发文量
265
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.
期刊最新文献
Authoritarian Neoliberalism and Asylum Seekers: the Silencing of Accounting and Accountability in Offshore Detention Centres Political Organisational Silence and the Ethics of Care: EU Migrant Restaurant Workers in Brexit Britain How Does Legal Status Inform Immigrant Agency During Encounters of Workplace Incivility? When Social Innovations Foster Integral Human Development: Evidence from the Impact of Theatrical Activities on Prison Inmates’ Social Skills Challenging or Threatening? The Double-Edged Sword Effect of Intelligent Technology Awareness on Accountants’ Unethical Decision-Making
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1