Corporate Social Performance and Innovation with High Social Benefits: A Quantitative Analysis

By Marcus Wagner. 2010

249 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management of Technology and Innovation, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ddbd1bd3fbd3d9676d818d0e3b31d0a6948bd47d

How researchers see this paper

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

In Management of Technology and Innovation

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

Are firms with different CSR profiles equally innovative? Empirical analysis with survey data (2013, methodology): “Strategic CSR seemingly should turn the related expense into a measurable potential return (McWilliams & Siegel, 2001;Wagner, 2010), as well as a unique, distinctive competitive position (e.g. ‘‘lower cost, better service’’).”
The Long-Term Sustenance of Sustainability Practices in MNCs: A Dynamic Capabilities Perspective of the Role of R&D and Internationalization (2012, unknown): “The literature has examined the independent effects of R&D and internationalization on sustainability practices (Hart 1997; Hunter and Bansal 2007; Padgett and Galan 2010; Wagner 2010).”
Corporate social responsibility and innovation: a resource‐based theory (2011, background): “, who introduces a longitudinal approach in research as to whether social report publication affects stock price in European listed banks during the period 2002-2008; and Wagner (2010)”
Innovation in Family Firms: A Systematic Literature Review and Guidance for Future Research (2018, methodology): “…a large majority use regression analyses, while a few rely on factor analyses (Craig and Moores 2006), principal component analyses (Llach and Nordquist 2010), econometric models (Wagner 2010) and structural equation modelling (Brinkerink and Bammens 2018; Filser et al. 2018; Kraus et al. 2012).”
CSR, Innovation, and Firm Performance in Sluggish Growth Contexts: A Firm-Level Empirical Analysis (2015, background): “Size matters for innovation too (see Russo and Fouts 1997; Wagner 2010), because large firms have more resources to invest in technological activities and exploit external opportunities (Cohen 1995); they also tend to be better organized to protect their innovations and capture the associated rents…”
Corporate Social Responsibility and Competitiveness within SMEs of the Fashion Industry: Evidence from Italy and France (2014, background): “innovation and performance by stimulating local stakeholder engagement [46,47] and by promoting the implementation of environmental management tools [48–51].”
Corporate Social Performance: A Review of Empirical Research Examining the Corporation–Society Relationship Using Kinder, Lydenberg, Domini Social Ratings Data (2017, background): “Another study discovered that family firms positively moderated the effect of socially beneficial innovation on CSP (Wagner, 2010), perhaps implying that having a personal stake in an organization’s future improves the likelihood that social investment may enhance substantive stakeholder outcomes.”
A supply chain sustainability innovation framework and evaluation methodology (2018, background): “Wagner (2010); Chang (2011); Tariq et al. (2017); Ansari and Kant (2017) (Continued) Trapp and Sarkis 2016; Badri Ahmadi, Kusi-Sarpong, and Rezaei 2017; Luthra et al. 2017; Golini et al. 2017; Das 2018; Taylor and Vachon 2018).”