How Corporate Social Responsibility Engagement Strategy Moderates the CSR–Financial Performance Relationship

By Zhi Tang, Clyde Eiríkur Hull, Sandra Rothenberg. 2012

715 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Accounting, Marketing, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/02281aebff7110c8b6efb59ebba448ecb7e2a4cc

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Accounting

In Marketing

In Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

Strategic CSR: A Concept Building Meta‐Analysis (2019, neutral): “The relationships between innovation, absorptive capacity, and CFP are well established in the strategy literature (Tsai, 2001; Zahra and George, 2002), but there is increasing evidence for the presence of these relationships in the CSR context as well (Delmas et al., 2011; Tang et al., 2012).”
A Review of the Nonmarket Strategy Literature (2016, neutral): “…on RBV investigated the moderating roles of competitive dynamism; nonmarket engagement strategy in terms of pace, relatedness, and consistency (Tang et al., 2012); firm- and industry-level R&D, innovation, and product differentiation (McWilliams & Siegel, 2000); and ventures’ long-term…”
When Does It Pay to be Good? Moderators and Mediators in the Corporate Sustainability–Corporate Financial Performance Relationship: A Critical Review (2017, background): “Based on the argumentation that pace, path, relatedness, and consistency of the sustainability engagement (Tang et al. 2012) have different implications on the impact of CS on CFP, a number of studies consider varying CS approaches as a moderating variable.”
The relationship between disclosures of corporate social performance and financial performance: Evidences from GRI reports in manufacturing industry (2015, methodology): “…from GRI.... International Journal of Production Economics (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2015.04.004i reputation as good company citizens thus can attract investors as well as other stakeholders (e.g. Berman et al., 1999; Brammer and Pavalin, 2006; Weber et al., 2008; Tang et al., 2012).”
CSR, Innovation, and Firm Performance in Sluggish Growth Contexts: A Firm-Level Empirical Analysis (2015, methodology): “However, following their recommendation and in line with CSR engagement strategy literature (Tang et al. 2012), we include two endogenous variables derived from a classification procedure that reflect firms’ CSR profiles (strategic versus responsive).”
The Political Dynamics of Sustainable Coffee: Contested Value Regimes and the Transformation of Sustainability (2016, neutral): “social performance (Margolis and Walsh, 2003; Tang et al., 2012).”
The Effect of Environmental, Social and Governance Consistency on Economic Results (2016, methodology): “Consistent with previous research [18,56], Equation (1) contains economic performance as the dependent variable, which is explained by ESG performance, interdimensional ESG consistency and control variables.”
The effects of managerial and employee attributions for corporate social responsibility initiatives (2017, background): “A potential vehicle to address this challenge is the “inside-out” approach (Tang et al., 2012) where employees are framed as key stakeholders for CSR initiatives.”
Walking and Talking Corporate Social Responsibility: Implications of Firm Size and Organizational Cost (2016, neutral): “A closer examination of the cost implications of CSR engagement seems especially pertinent considering that a link between increased CSR engagement and ﬁnancial performance or enhanced competitiveness remains contested (Delmas et al., 2013; Tang et al., 2012).”