SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.17 número55Looking at Organizational Change Through the Construction and Reconstruction of the Underpinning Values of the Organization Through Interactions Among StakeholdersAn Innovative Approach to Stakeholder Theory: application in spanish transnational corporations índice de autoresíndice de assuntospesquisa de artigos
Home Pagelista alfabética de periódicos  

Serviços Personalizados

Journal

Artigo

Indicadores

Links relacionados

Compartilhar


Revista Brasileira de Gestão de Negócios

versão impressa ISSN 1983-0807versão On-line ISSN 1806-4892

Rev. bras. gest. neg. vol.17 no.55 São Paulo abr. 2015

https://doi.org/10.7819/rbgn.v17i55.2026 

Article

The Influence of Ownership Concentration on Firm Resource Allocations to Employee Relations, External Social Actions, and Environmental Action

Vicente Lima Crisóstomo1 

Fátima de Souza Freire2 

1Accounting Department, Universidade Federal do Ceará, CE, Brazil

2Accounting Department, University of Brasília, DF, Brazil


ABSTRACT

Objective:

The purpose of this work is to examine the influence of ownership concentration on the funds allocated to CSR in Brazilian firm.

Design/methodology/approach:

Econometric models have been estimated, with an index of CSR as the dependent variable, and ownership concentration as the explanatory variable, together with relevant control variables suggested in the literature (profitability, leverage, growth opportunities, and firm size). A Brazilian CSR database has been built using data extracted from two different sources, one relative to CSR data and another that provides ownership structure and financial data. CSR policy is proxied by an index obtained as the ratio between funds directed to social action (employee relations, external social actions, and environmental action) and net sales.

Findings:

The findings indicate that CSR is positively influenced by firm ownership concentration in Brazil.

Practical implications:

The positive influence of ownership concentration on CSR may be an indication that large controlling shareholders of Brazilian firm may be considering CSR as an effective way to improve the image and reputation of the firm and its owners. This belief may be stimulating CSR projects and their disclosure in Brazil.

Originality/value:

This work is an additional contribution to the debate about the role played by ownership structure on CSR. Taking into account that the central point of Stakeholder Theory is a firm’s concern with all its stakeholders, the research builds on Stakeholder and Agency Theories by assessing the influence of large controlling shareholders on a firm’s social concerns.

Keywords: Corporate social responsibility; Ownership structure; Ownership concentration

Texto completo disponível apenas em PDF.

Full text available only in PDF format.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors are grateful to the anonymous referees and the editorial board, in name of Prof. Jeffrey S. Harrison (Guest Co-Editor), for their insightful suggestions. Vicente Lima Crisóstomo acknowledges the support from CNPq (477343/2013-9 - Universal 14/2013).

REFERENCES

Adams, C. A. (2008). A commentary on: corporate social responsibility reporting and reputation risk management. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 21(3), 365-370. [ Links ]

Aguilera, R. V., Rupp, D. E., Williams, C. A., & Ganapathi, J. (2007). Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: a multilevel theory of social change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 836-863. [ Links ]

Allen, J. W., & Phillips, G. M. (2000). Corporate Equity Ownership, strategic alliances, and product market relationships. Journal of Finance, 55(6), 2791-2815. [ Links ]

Barnea, A., & Rubin, A. (2010). Corporate social responsibility as a conflict between shareholders. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(1), 71-86. [ Links ]

Baron, D. P., Harjoto, M. A., & Jo, H. (2009). The economics and politics of corporate social performance.[Graduate School of Business Research Paper nº 1993; Rock Center for Corporate Governance Working Paper nº 45]. Stanford Graduate School of Business, Stanford, CA, United States. Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=1202390. [ Links ]

Baughn, C. C., Bodie, N. L. D., & Mcintosh, J. C. (2007). Corporate social and environmental responsibility in asian countries and other geographical regions. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 14(4), 189-205. [ Links ]

Baumann-Pauly, D., Wickert, C., Spence, L. J., & Scherer, A. G. (2013). Organizing corporate social responsibility in small and large firms: size matters. Journal of Business Ethics , 115(4), 693-705. [ Links ]

Bebbington, J., Larrinaga-González, C., & Moneva-Abadía, J. M. (2008a). Corporate social reporting and reputation risk management. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal , 21(3), 337-361. [ Links ]

Bebbington, J., Larrinaga-González, C., & Moneva-Abadía, J. M. (2008b). Legitimating reputation/the reputation of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal , 21(3), 371-374. [ Links ]

Brown, J. A., & Forster, W. R. (2013). CSR and Stakeholder theory: a tale of Adam Smith. Journal of Business Ethics , 112(2), 301-312. [ Links ]

Chirinko, R. S., & Schaller, H. (1995). Why does liquidity matter in investment equations? Journal of Money, Credit & Banking, 27(2), 527-548. [ Links ]

Chiu, S. C.; Sharfman, M. (2011). Legitimacy, visibility, and the antecedents of corporate social performance: an investigation of the instrumental perspective. Journal of Management, 37(6), 1558-1585. [ Links ]

Cochran, P. L. (2007). The evolution of corporate social responsibility. Business Horizons, 50(6), 449-454. [ Links ]

Crisóstomo, V. L. (2011).Inversión, restricción financiera y estructura de propiedad en Brasil. Saarbrücken: Editorial Académica. [ Links ]

Crisóstomo, V. L., Freire, F. S., & Parente, P. H. N. (2014). An analysis of corporate social responsibility in Brazil: growth, firm size, sector and internal stakeholders involved in policy definition. Pensamiento & Gestión, 37, 125-149. [ Links ]

Crisóstomo, V. L., Freire, F. S., & Soares, P. M. (2012). Uma análise comparativa da responsabilidade social corporativa entre o setor bancário e outros no Brasil. Contabilidade Vista & Revista, 23(4), 103-128. [ Links ]

Crisóstomo, V. L., Freire, F. S., & Vasconcellos, F. C. (2011). Corporate social responsibility, firm value and financial performance in Brazil. Social Responsibility Journal, 7(2), 295-309. [ Links ]

Cuervo, Á. (2002). Corporate governance mechanisms: a plea for less code of good governance and more market control. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 10(2), 84-93. [ Links ]

Day, R., & Woodward, T. (2009). CSR reporting and the UK financial services sector. Journal of Applied Accounting Research,10(3), 159-175. [ Links ]

De Los Ríos Berjillos, A., Ruiz Lozano, M., Tirado Valencia, P., & Carbonero Ruz, M. (2012). Una aproximación a la relación entre información sobre la responsabilidad social orientada al cliente y la reputación corporativa de las entidades financieras españolas. Cuadernos de Economía y Dirección de la Empresa, 15(3), 130-140. [ Links ]

Deegan, C. (2002). The legitimising effect of social and environmental disclosures - a theoretical foundation. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal , 15(3), 282-311. [ Links ]

Deegan, C., Rankin, M., & Tobin, J. (2002). An examination of the corporate social and environmental disclosures of BHP from 1983-1997: a test of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal , 15(3), 312-343. [ Links ]

Deegan, C., Rankin, M., & Voght, P. (2000). Firms’ disclosure reactions to major social incidents: Australian evidence. Accounting Forum, 24, 101-130. [ Links ]

Deephouse, D. L., & Carter, S. M. (2005). An examination of differences between organizational legitimacy and organizational reputation. Journal of Management Studies, 42(2), 329-360. [ Links ]

Dowling, J. B., & Pfeffer, J. (1975). Organizational legitimacy: Social values and organizational behavior. Pacific Sociological Review, 18(1), 122-136. [ Links ]

Dyck, A., & Zingales, L. (2004). Private benefits of control: an international comparison. TheJournal of Finance , 59(2), 537-600. [ Links ]

Eng, L. L., & Mak, Y. T. (2003). Corporate governance and voluntary disclosure. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 22, 325-345. [ Links ]

Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman Publishing. [ Links ]

Freeman, R. E. (1999). Divergent stakeholder theory. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 233-236. [ Links ]

Freeman, R. E., & Phillips, R. A. (2002). Stakeholder theory: a libertarian defense. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12(3), 331-349. [ Links ]

Freeman, R. E., Rusconi, G., Signori, S., & Strudler, A. (2012). Stakeholder theory(ies): ethical ideas and managerial action. Journal of Business Ethics , 109(1), 1-2. [ Links ]

Freeman, R. E., Wicks, A. C., & Parmar, B. (2004). Stakeholder theory and “The corporate objective revisited”. Organization Science, 15(3), 364-369. [ Links ]

Gjølberg, M. (2009). Measuring the immeasurable?: Constructing an index of CSR practices and CSR performance in 20 countries. ScandinavianJournal of Management , 25(1), 10-22. [ Links ]

Godos Díez, J. L., Fernández Gago, R., & Cabeza García, L. (2012). Propiedad y control en la puesta en práctica de la RSC. Cuadernos de Economía y Dirección de la Empresa , 15(1), 1-11. [ Links ]

Goergen, M., & Renneboog, L.(2001). Investment policy, internal financing and ownership concentration in the UK. Journal of Corporate Finance, 7(3), 257-284. [ Links ]

Griffin, J. J., & Mahon, J. F. (1997). The corporate social performance and corporate financial performance debate: twenty-five years of incomparable research. Business and Society Review, 36(1), 5-31. [ Links ]

Halme, M., & Huse, M. (1997). The influence of corporate governance, industry and country factors on environmental reporting. Scandinavian Jounal of Managment, 13, 137-157. [ Links ]

Harjoto, M. A., & Jo, H. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and operating performance. Journal of the Academy of Business and Economics, 8(1), 59-71. [ Links ]

Harrison, J. S., Bosse, D. A., & Phillips, R. A. (2010). Managing for stakeholders, stakeholder utility functions, and competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 31(1), 58-74. [ Links ]

Husted, B. W., & Allen, D. B. (2007). Strategic corporate social responsibility and value creation among large firms: lessons from the spanish experience. Long Range Planning,40(6), 594-610. [ Links ]

Instituto Brasileiro de Análises Sociais e Econômicas. (2008).Balanço social, dez anos: o desafio da transparência. Rio de Janeiro: Autor. [ Links ]

Jamali, D. (2008). A Stakeholder approach to corporate social responsibility: a fresh perspective into theory and practice. Journal of Business Ethics ,82, 213-231. [ Links ]

Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency cost and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360. [ Links ]

Johnson, R. A., & Greening, D. W. (1999). The effects of corporate governance and Institutional Ownership types on Corporate Social Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42(5), 564-576. [ Links ]

La Porta, R., López-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1998). Law and finance. Journal of Political Economy, 106(6), 1113-1155. [ Links ]

Li, W., & Zhang, R. (2010). Corporate social responsibility, ownership structure, and political interference: evidence from China. Journal of Business Ethics , 96, 631-645. [ Links ]

Li, Y., Richardson, G., & Thornton, D. (1997). Corporate disclosure of environmental liability information: theory and evidence. Contemporary Accounting Research, 14, 435-474. [ Links ]

López-Iturriaga, F. J., & Crisóstomo, V. L. (2010). Do leverage, dividend payout and ownership concentration influence firms’ value creation? An analysis of Brazilian firms. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 46(3), 80-94. [ Links ]

López-Iturriaga, F. J., & López-de-Foronda, Ó. (2011).Corporate social responsibility and large shareholders: an analysis of european multinational enterprises. Transnational Corporations Review, 3(3), 17-33. [ Links ]

Machado, M. R., Machado, M. A. V., & Santos, A. D. (2010). A relação entre o setor econômico e investimentos sociais e ambientais. Contabilidade, Gestão e Governança, 13(3), 102-115. [ Links ]

Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. (2003). Misery loves companies: rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 268-305. [ Links ]

McWilliams, A., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, P. M. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: strategic implications. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 1-18. [ Links ]

Minoja, M. (2012). Stakeholder management theory, firm strategy, and ambidexterity. Journal of Business Ethics , 109(1), 67-82. [ Links ]

Orlitzky, M. (2001). Does firm size confound the relationship between corporate social performance and firm financial performance? Journal of Business Ethics , 33, 167-180. [ Links ]

Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: a meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24(3), 403-441. [ Links ]

Prado-Lorenzo, J.-M., Gallego-Alvarez, I., & Garcia-Sanchez, I. M. (2009). Stakeholder engagement and corporate social responsibility reporting: the ownership structure effect. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management , 16, 94-107. [ Links ]

Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1994). Strategy as a field of study: why search for a new paradigm? Strategic Management Journal , 15, 5-16. [ Links ]

Reast, J., Maon, F., Lindgreen, A., & Vanhamme, J. (2013). Legitimacy-seeking organizational strategies in controversial industries: a case study analysis and a bidimensional model. Journal of Business Ethics , 118, 139-153. [ Links ]

Roberts, R. W. (1992). Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: an application of stakeholder theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17(6), 595-612. [ Links ]

Robertson, D. C. (2009). Corporate social responsibility and different stages of economic development: Singapore, Turkey, and Ethiopia. Journal of Business Ethics , 88, 617-633. [ Links ]

Said, R., Zainuddin, Y. H., & Haron, H. (2009). The relationship between corporate social responsibility disclosure and corporate governance characteristics in Malaysian public listed companies. Social Responsibility Journal , 5(2), 212-226. [ Links ]

Schiantarelli, F., & Sembenelli, A. (2000). Form of ownership and financial constraints: Panel data evidence from flow of funds and investment equations. Empirica, 27(2), 175-192. [ Links ]

See, G. K. H. (2009). Harmonious society and Chinese CSR: is there really a link? Journal of Business Ethics , 89(1), 1-22. [ Links ]

Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1997). A survey of corporate governance. Journal of Finance , 52(2), 737-783. [ Links ]

Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: strategic and institutional approaches. TheAcademy of Management Review, 20(3), 571-610. [ Links ]

Tilling, M. V., & Tilt, C. A. (2010). The edge of legitimacy: voluntary social and environmental reporting in Rothmans’ 1956-1999 annual reports. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal , 23, 55-81. [ Links ]

Tullberg, J. (2013). Stakeholder theory: some revisionist suggestions. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 42, 127-135. [ Links ]

Udayasankar, K. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and firm size. Journal of Business Ethics , 83, 167-175. [ Links ]

Ullman, A. A. (1985). Data in search of a theory: a critical examination of the relationships among social performance, social disclosure, and economic performance of US firms. Academy of Management Review , 10(3), 540-557. [ Links ]

Villalonga, B., & Amit, R. (2006). How do family ownership, control and management affect firm value? Journal of Financial Economics, 80(2), 385-417. [ Links ]

Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance-financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18(4), 303-319. [ Links ]

Wood, D. J. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. TheAcademy of Management Review , 16(4), 691-718. [ Links ]

2Evaluation process: Double Blind Review

Received: June 29, 2014; Accepted: May 29, 2015

Editor in charge: Jeffrey S. Harrison, Dr.

1.

Vicente Lima Crisóstomo: PhD in Finance, University of Valladolid (Spain) [vicentelc@gmail.com]

2.

Fátima de Souza Freire : Post-PhD in Environmental Accounting, University of ST Andrews (Scotland) [ffreire@unb.br]

Creative Commons License This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License