The enthusiasm for CSR is developing among organizations, yet the reasons are variable. Nonetheless, the dedication can to a great extent be clarified by expanding weight from partners (McWilliams et al. 2006). The weight is communicated by clients, as well as by workers, suppliers, bunches, non-administrative associations and governments. The enthusiasm for CSR has developed in multinational multidisciplinary organizations that are presented to different business models and guidelines, lawful structures, and partner interest for CSR in the nation to become especially in they work in. A late improvement in the field is another EU control on the reporting commitment of CSR in expansive organizations, which was presented in 2014 and puts more weight on organizations to participate in socially mindful exercises (European Commission 2015). As per this plan, all European organizations with more than 500 representatives are obliged to report approach data, dangers and results as far as natural, social and parts of the worker, rights, battling debasement and issues of defilement and Differences in their Top managerial staff
Weight from partners as an inspiration figure, different purposes behind the CSR responsibility are empowering variables for organizations, as upper hands as an expansion in the pieces of the overall industry and the inspiration of the representatives. Examine demonstrates that CSR exercises not just give advantages to the organization. Or maybe, they likewise prompt expanded costs, one-time and continuous expenses notwithstanding a danger of disappointment of CSR responsibility, which can prompt question among the partners and thus harm the organization (Weber 2008 McWilliams et al. 2001 and McWilliams et al. 2006).
There is adequate writing on the relationship amongst CSR and financial services. Be that as it may, past research has demonstrated an absence of predictable confirmation of the effect of CSR exercises on financial performance. Positive, negative and unbiased connections were displayed, and there are no unmistakable impetuses for organizations to vaguely work with CSR on the premise of these examinations. Among these concentrates, the vast majority of them drove relapses to the variable not particularly characterized, which could be viewed as a hole in research on CSR, where the terms and estimation frameworks are unclear and in this manner distinctive each other. This writing will help different positive effects and won\’t help the positive effect of CSR on the financial performance of the organization, including an examination of the non-significant relationship and the effect of CSR disclosures.
1.1 History of CSR
The idea of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has a long history of how this influences the conduct of associations. To comprehend the effect of CSR on hierarchical conduct, it is important to comprehend its advancement. Carroll (1999) noticed that the reference to social obligation concerns developed for the most part in the years 1930 and 1940. On the off chance that in a handier manner examine, it is interesting that in 1946 to note magazine fortune officials addressed about their social duties (Fortune 1946, cited in Carroll 1999). Carroll (1999) additionally noticed that formal written work on CSR started especially in the twentieth century.
Evaluation – In 1950, the emphasis was on corporate responsibility regarding society and for society. In the 1960s, occasions, individuals and thoughts have assumed a critical part in the portrayal of social changes opened in this decade. In the 1970s, business pioneers in view of the customary administration capacities for corporate social duty, while in 1980, the organization and the social interests of society are accommodated and turn out to be touchier to their individuals. In the 1990s, the possibility of CSR has turned out to be all around acknowledged, CSR has been connected in the writing to the methodology, lastly in the 2000s, CSR has at long last turned into an essential political issue. (Cited Madrakhimova 2013)
In every one of the announcements of different specialists, plainly, despite the fact that the marvel of social duty has long backtracked before the twentieth century, the wealth of writing on CSR started for the most part since the 1950s. What\’s more, a while later CSR turned into a substantial territory of enthusiasm for some social orders far and wide. Associations started his attentiveness toward the group and have been creating in the bearing and esteem.
1.2 Definition of CSR
CSR should be characterized and executed; a controversial debate stays between colleges, organizations and society. Despite the fact that the idea of corporate social responsibility (CSR) has been pushed by organizations for a considerable length of time and is generally utilized, worldwide concurrence on the most proficient method to extension this gap. Organizations is tricky on the grounds that they are progressively required to accommodate social principles while producing money related returns. To determine this issue, the accompanying definition is introduced. As indicated by Business for Social responsibility (BSR), corporate social responsibility is characterized as monetary achievement in a way that regards moral values and regards individuals, groups and the common habitat (Tsoutsoura 2004). McWilliams and Siegel (2000) describe CSR as activities that appear to advance social prosperity, about the organization\’s advantage and what law requires. On the other hand, as indicated by Frooman (1997), the definition illustrates what CSR is: a move made by an organization that chooses the organization, which is fundamentally hindered which is additionally an identifiable social partner (Frooman 1997 cited Tsoutsoura 2004)
According to EU Commission (2002) CSR is an idea that permits organizations to incorporate social and ecological worries into their business action and in exchanges with partners on an intentional premise (cited Crowther and Aras 2008). (Frederick 2006) There was an essential for the organization to lead the organization\’s business, a reasonable and economical harmony between the requests of different gatherings specifically influenced, a harmony between shareholders, representatives, clients and the overall population (cited Smith 2011)
(Bowen 1953) expressed that the commitments of the organization to seek after this arrangement to settle on those choices or take after the activity lines that are desirable to the goals and estimations of our general public (cited Smith 2011) Carroll expressed that corporate social obligation envelops the monetary, legitimate, moral and optional desires that society has at associations at a given time (Carroll 1979, cited Golob and Bartlett 2007).
A large portion of the ideas in the proposed definition are normal among professionals and CSR associations, approvals for the generation of key sections and distribution of riches, partner administration, moral frameworks, reasonable administration rehearses joined with the utilization of a framework approach and different business practices make one of a kind and sound definition. Such exhaustive audit of CSR can be deciphered as an extensive framework to take after best practices in the work environment and outside the association for the change of all partners
2.1 Relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance
The relationship between social responsibility and the financial performance of the organization is currently a standout amongst the most critical themes of study and research on social responsibility. CSR describes the dedication of an organization to ensure and enhance the social assurance and to produce enduring advantages to partners (Hay, Gray and Gates 1976)
A few analysts argues that socially mindful activities can make extra costs that can put an organization to a financial disservice contrasted with less socially capable associations (Ullman 1975, Vance 1985 cited Lin, Yang and Liou 2008)
These extra expenses could originate from exercises, for example, social projects, philanthropy, group improvement, upkeep offices in monetarily hindered regions and the formation of environmentally friendly strategies (McGuire, Sundgren and Schneewei 1988) others have no relationship amongst CSR and organization performance (Alexander and Buchholz 1978; Guerard, Stone and Andrews 1988) CSR are diverse perspectives on this relationship, the conclusion to various results.
2.1.1 Positive Association
(Moskowitz 1972, Parket and Eilbirt 1975, and Sturdivant and Ginter 1977) found that the social responsibility to the financial performance of the share trading system of an association. Conceivable clarifications from these creators for their outcomes are offered to significant partners, for example, banks, financial specialists and powers made strides. An organization could profit by CSR in light of the fact that their choices regard the earth are regularly connected with lower waste and in this manner bring down expenses. These enhanced connections can expand interest in these organizations by the shareholders (Mussawi and Evans 1986; Moskowitz 1972 cited Lin, Yang and Liou 2008) deep quality increment; increment the separation from client procurement (Solomon, Hanson 1985) and in relations with the powers that the administrative expenses (McGuire, Sundgren and Schneeweis 1988) could be lessened.
Waddock and Graves (1997) utilizing a specimen of S&P 500 organizations have recognized a positive relationship between Corporate Social performance (CSP) and financial performance where CSP was taken as an independent variable and additionally a dependent variable. Their decision was that, a positive connection amongst CSP and financial performance is visible in either circumstance, in spite of the fact that there are a few contrasts as indicated by the size of the associations. The two creators have measured the financial performance principally utilizing three bookkeeping factors: Return on Assets (ROA), Return on Equity (ROE) and Return on sales (ROS). In the investigation utilizing CSP as the dependent variable and financial performance as the independent variable, CSP was altogether identified with all ROA, ROE and ROS inferring that better financial performance prompts better CSP.
The most far-reaching study with positive results was a meta-examination directed by Orlitzky et al. (2003). A meta-examination is a solid strategy for research since it measures the parameters of individual studies, instead of collecting studies. This particular meta-investigation analyzed 52 contemplates with a 33,878 specimen estimate over a 30-year traverse. Orlitzky inferred that not just does CSP impact CFP, however the other way around too, implying that a bidirectional relationship exists between the two factors. This conclusion bolsters the instrumental partner hypothesis since administrators profit by addressing the requirements of partners. Because of corresponding advantages of the relationship amongst partners and the association, this study bolsters the position that CSR projects are connected with different unmistakable monetary advantages over the long haul.
126.96.36.199 Factors Contributing to a Positive Association
The expansion in uses in CSR extends in the previous decade recommends directors locate a monetary advantage from CSR programs. Late studies demonstrate that the majority of the studies locate a positive relationship (Beurden and Gossling 2008; Wu 2006; Allouche and Laroche 2005; Goll and Rasheed 2004; Orlitzky 2003 cited Palmer, 2012)
188.8.131.52.1 Improve the reputation
CSR projects are competitive advantages because they improve corporate reputation. Partners will probably participate in exchanges with organizations that have a CSR record of demonstrating a promise to the group and environment. The advantages of upgraded reputation incorporate less examination from society, an expansion in client and investor reliability, and an expansion in intangible resources—all of which prompt more grounded financial performance over the long haul. In the first place, firms that take part in CSR programs get less investigation from the group. McDonald\’s and its association in the Ronald McDonald Houses serves as a flawless illustration. McDonald\’s dedication to helping families in need upgraded its notoriety to the group. Amid the 1992 South Focal Los Angeles riots, as pointed out by Philip Kotler and Nancy Lee in their book, Corporate Social Duty: Doing the Most Useful for Your Organization and Your Cause, \”vandalism brought about colossal harm to business in the area…rioters declined to hurt [McDonald\’s] outlets\” (Kotler and Lee 2005) accordingly, McDonald\’s procured an upper hand against challengers by escaping various damage costs through its association in CSR and improved reputation.
Klassen and McLaughlin\’s (1996), Carter, Kale and Grimm (2000) have additionally researched the relationship between environmental purchasing and firm performance, in which they recognize environmental purchasing as a key measurement of CSR furthermore an essential calculate the supply chain. Their theories were as per the following. Environmentally friendly purchasing policies prompt expanded firm performance and Environmentally friendly purchasing policies lead to decreased firm performance. The outcomes demonstrated that natural obtaining, emphatically identified with net wage and adversely identified with cost of merchandise sold. Along these lines the creators certainly reasoned that environmentally friendly purchasing policies prompt expanded firm performance. So because of the environmentally friendly purchasing policies the organization can demanded so there reputation is going high. When the reputation is increasing that will lead to a positive financial performance.
184.108.40.206.2 Increase Income
Another potential clarification for a positive partner amongst CSP and CFP is that CSR projects are income generators Orlitzky (2008). Particularly over the long haul, either through an expanded client base or a capacity to build costs. Confirm from the Corporate Social Responsibility Discriminations Study Led by Berland (2010) study depended on 1,001 online meetings with U.S. shoppers. The outcomes demonstrated that \”American shoppers will pay a premium for merchandise from socially dependable organizations, with 70 percent saying they would pay more for a $100 item from an organization they see as mindful.\” More research must be done to decide the amount more they will pay, however these outcomes enlighten that companies might have the capacity to profit by expanded incomes with CSR activities. Be that as it may, a conceivable impediment is whether the expansion in income takes care of the increment in expense of CSR usage over the long haul.
Client base is likewise possibly expanded with CSP, which produces increments in deals. In 2010, Cone Correspondences overviewed 1,057 US buyers and found that 80% are liable to switch brands, comparable in cost and quality, to one that backings a cause. (Cone communications 2010) By giving shoppers even more motivation to relate to a respectable brand, organizations can profit with an expansion in piece of the overall industry, and at last help in deals income. So increasing income will lead to a positive financial performance.
220.127.116.11.3 Attract new employees
In the event that firm works for the welfare of its representatives, suppliers, speculators, and shoppers and so forth then it will be productive. On the off chance that an organization makes principles and direction about the necessities and fulfillment of its representatives, for example, rules for safe workplace, that is the confirmation of the organization\’s social duties towards them. Representative fulfillment impacts on their performance and ultimately financial performance spontaneity. While making and advancing the item, organization ought to consider every one of the worries identified with the item including any symptoms, hurts, related risks or even moderateness in sensible range, which will in the long run drive the clients towards the item coming about because of the picture made by the organization in connection of its CSR, along these lines, the financial performance will upgrade.
At the point when an organization is helping out the advantages of its speculators like standards about suitable data accessible for the stockholders, their inclusion in deciding, then it speaks to association\’s CSR for its financial specialists. Stock cost of more CSR firms will increment as contrast with the individuals who do less for the advantages of it speculators Mishra and Suar (2010). Firm plays out its CSR towards it representatives giving them rewards, pay, compensation on time, subsequently they will be persuaded and their dedication towards firm will upgrade which thus increment the worker execution so company\’s firm’s financial performance will increment. Firm form the solid association with its suppliers by auspicious paying the price tag of products assumed on praise, by along these lines it pulls in different suppliers and firm can buy less costly material due to rivalry. Accordingly company\’s financial performance will improve. As indicated by Linh and Hieu (2011). By performing CSR exercises, firm can make great picture in the brain of clients, government, and the general population that will improve company\’s financial performance. Thusly, it is inferred that CSR positively affects the company\’s financial performance.
18.104.22.168.4 Decreased Operating Costs
One contention against CSR projects is it is an expansion in cost and in this manner conflicts with the goal of a business. Be that as it may, this is a short-term focus, and when performed effectively, CSR projects can really diminish working expenses over the long haul. At the point when joined with the other numerous primary concern budgetary advantages of CSR projects, the impact is by all accounts more prominent than the expansion in cost of CSR usage.
El Ghoul et al. (2011) inspected how the cost of value capital would influence CSR with a specific end goal to comprehend the relationship amongst CSR and financial performance. They content that high CSR firms ought to have minimal effort of capital than low CSR firms, gave that different factors stay unaltered. It was demonstrated by an example of US firms-year perceptions from 1992 to 2007.As for the creators\’ decision CSR exercises add to society everywhere as well as they empower the organization to lessen its back cost. These creators facilitate go ahead to contend that putting resources into CSR exercises, for example, representative relations, ecological arrangements and item techniques will bring down the cost of value and enhance the association\’s esteem for shareholders and positively effect for the financial performance.
22.214.171.124.5 Reduced Business Risk
When the company’s reputation get stronger, it leads to lower the business risk, Those organizations which are assuming more prominent part for the welfare of society, environment, giving wellbeing comforts and so forth these makes great reputation in the mind of clients, suppliers, representatives and so on in competitive setting. These organizations get a larger number of advantages than the cost they need to manage for the welfare of society. In this manner Company\’s CSR improve the financial performance of firm, so when a firm has great FP it can support the welfare of society. This study demonstrates that association\’s CSR and FP are identified with each other. Organizations ought to consider the CSR when any choice is made on the grounds that it shields the organization from costs, which happened because of reactions, restrictions and strikes and claims against environment risky Ehsan, Kaleem, and Jabeen, (2012)
Simpson and Kohers (2002) have analyzed the connection amongst CSP and financial performance in the managing an account industry. Taking ROA and credit misfortunes to aggregate advances, to gauge financial performance, they have reasoned that there is a solid positive connection amongst CSP and financial performance. The outcomes as per the CRA evaluations have demonstrated that higher social performance banks have higher ROA and lower credit misfortunes so it lessens the danger of the association.
So considering all the above factors it is concluded that there is a strong positive relationship between corporate social responsibility and financial performance. The vast majority of the creators have mentioned to short-term profitability or/and long-term benefit viewpoints somehow or other, in spite of the fact that it may not be specified specifically terms.
2.1.2 Negative Associations
There is one and stand out social duty of business – to utilize its assets and take part in exercises intended to expand benefits so long as it stays inside the guidelines of the game, which is to say, participates in open and free rivalry without double dealing and extortion\’ (Friedman 1970).
This notable citation made by Friedman (1970) underpins the neo-established hypothesis expressing that the part of the administration of an organization is to settle on choices exclusively in light of expansion of the partnership\’s long haul showcase esteem, which incorporates the wealth of the organization\’s proprietors (Fowl et al., 2007 cited Bråtenius 2015).
As the administration of an organization goes about as a specialist for shareholders, it has no order to take activities on socially responsible exercises that don\’t produce expanded earnings to the firm (Pava and Krausz 1996 cited Friedman 1970). This neo-established view implicate that interests in CSR exercises will put the organization at an competitive disadvantage, which thusly prompts a negative relationship between these socially-dependable exercises and market performance (Aupperle et al., 1985).
An early study showings a negative relationship is Vance (1975), where the CSR engagement is measured as firms\’ level of social duty taking into account subjective discernment and appraisals made by businessmen and students. Vance (1975) utilizes the appraisals as an intermediary for CSR to discover a connection with stock cost, and it is reasoned that CSR firms are bad speculations for financial specialists as a negative relationship is found amongst CSR and stock cost.
For the most part Friedman (1970) has contended that a business\’ essential duty is to profit, and that the main interests that matter when settling on administrative choices are those of the shareholders (Friedman 1970, cited Lin, Yang and Liou 2009). His contention was that moral and willful contemplations are unimportant and the choices including this CSR component may hurt the association\’s financial performance (Lin, Yang and Liou 2009)
In a later study, Hassel, Nilsson and Nyquist (2011) exhibit comparative results as they look at how CSR influences the financial performance of Swedish organizations, where CSR and financial performance are spoken to and measured by natural data and market esteem, individually. The study reasons that high environmental performance is costly and that this kind of speculation along these lines adversely influences the normal income and market esteem. Organizations with a highly rated environmental performance are along these lines not remunerated by speculators (Hassel et al., 2011).
2.1.3 Null Hypothesis
The experimental and hypothetical studies to date additionally propose a second possibility, that there is just no relationship between corporate social responsibility and financial performance (Friedman 1970). The latest and solid exact study finding a questionable or no relationship is the 1985 study directed by Aupperle et al. (1985). The four segments of CSR projects in this study were financial, legitimate, moral, and generous obligations. With a specific end goal to maintain a strategic distance from some methodological issues of measuring CSP in past studies, they made their own particular estimation for CSP and, through observational testing, finished up their approach was solid. Their measure incorporated the looking over of 241 Presidents. To quantify financial performance, they utilized profit for resources (ROA) and \”utilized both short-term (one year) and long haul ROA (five years) (Aupperle, Carroll and Hatfield 1985) The study presumed that there is no noteworthy relationship between social duty and monetary execution, it didn\’t make a difference whether fleeting or long haul ROA were utilized, nor did it make a difference if that pointer were balanced or unadjusted for hazard. Not just does this study highlight another conceivable relationship amongst CSR and CFP, yet that procedure for measuring CSP can impact the relationship. All together for the determination of such a study to be legitimate, utilizing a substantial and dependable procedure to quantify CSP is critical.
A one-question remains, which is in what manner can no relationship exist amongst CSP and CFP. A hypothetical study led by Ullman (1985) endeavors to answer this question. Ullman guessed there are such a variety of mediating factors between CSP and CFP that there is no motivation to aside from any relationship by any stretch of the imagination (Ullman 1985). Also, Ulman showed there are numerous estimation issues that still exist to measure the intangible impact of corporate social responsibility. Current estimations of CSP include certain measures of judgment since all parts of CSR are not as quantitative as dollars spent on CSR programs, so the validity of such measures may puzzle CSP and CFP comes about. The mindfulness levels of partners to a company\’s CSR projects may likewise contribute the invalid theory. On the off chance that partners don\’t know about the CSR programs because of inadequate advertising, the projects can\’t influence their choices and states of mind toward the organization, and along these lines won\’t affect financial performance.
3. EMPIRICAL RESULT
The above finding perceives a questionable relationship between corporate social duty and financial performance. Numerous studies contend that CSR positively affects financial performance through the fulfillment of partners\’ objectives (Freeman 1984)
Orlitzky (2008) describes in his study \”CSR enhances administrative learning and aptitudes and upgrade corporate reputation\”.
A negative connection is built up by Friedman (1970). He trusts that CSR is excessive and decreases the company\’s aggressiveness and its financial performance. Quazi (2003) and Lantos (2001) contend this proof and exhibit it by the \”invisible hand\” component where the quest for benefit would prompt socially desired results.
McWilliams and Siegel (2001) contend for no relationship amongst CSR and financial performance. Tsoutsoura (2004) conceives that the absence of accord of estimation approach as it identifies with corporate social performance confounds the connection amongst CSR and financial performance. Allouche and Laroche (2006) disclose the trouble to locate an immediate connection by breaking points concerning ideas, systems and information utilized. Numerous creators picked as a measure of CSR the additional money related divulgation and demonstrate that the connection between CSR revelation and financial performance can be likewise positive, negative or there can be no connection.
(Bowman and Haire 1976; Preston 1978 cited to Najah and Jarboui 2013) analyze the ROE (Return on Equity) of organizations distributed social reports and those that don\’t. The outcomes demonstrate that organizations divulgating social data has fundamentally higher ROE. In addition Roberts (1992) recognizes positive relationship between the level of benefit and dispersal of social data. However an exact investigation of Richardson and Welker (2001) cited Najah and Jarboui (2013) found a factually noteworthy positive relationship amongst CSR and cost of capital, which means ascent of CSR would expand company\’s cost of capital and the other way around. Moreover they expresses that Influence is emphatically identified with social divulgences. In any case the creators state, finishing up the contention, that regardless of CSR being positively identified with cost of capital it might even now advantage different partners of the association other than capital financial specialists.
Analysts have reacted by endeavoring to show the impact of CSR on benefit. Be that as it may, the consequences of a few exact investigations of the relationship amongst CSR and profitability have been uncertain, reporting positive, negative, and neutral results. Conceivable clarifications for these shifted comes about incorporate contrasts in operationalizing the factors crosswise over studies and a conflicting relationship mediated by one or more factors.
Since numerous associations demonstrate noteworthy concern when undertaking social activities in a very aggressive environment, the development in socially capable ventures and in CSR mindfulness among general society may prompt effective firms proactively balancing short-term financial objectives with long haul economical corporate brand building. In this manner, advertisers ought to choose social projects carefully and guarantee that their correspondences make the association between the social area and the firm so buyers see activities as proactive and socially inspired.
Examining the effect of CSR on financial performance is an unpredictable issue. Depending entirely on a conventional approach does not resolve the question since it does not have a measure of firm-level interest in Research and development. As noticed, a vast assortment of exact confirmation exhibits that Research and development speculation has a solid positive effect on benefit. Each innovation based organization battles to keep Research and development center adjusted to corporate business methodology. Given the long haul introduction of economical improvement, effective Research and development ventures may come about because of a more drawn out time skyline. This is particularly genuine while inspecting the significance of impalpable resources, for example, reputation and information systems, which can transform into a wellspring of market esteem and an upper hand. Also, a state of center for organizations effectively occupied with Research and development was to demonstrate that CSR ought not be seen just as an extra or simply generous attempt however as a focal methodology in the company\’s quest for benefit.
Alexander, JG. And Buchholz, RA. 1978. “Corporate social responsibility and stock market performance”. Academy of Management Journal; 21(3): 479–86
Aupperle, K.E., Carroll, A.B. and Hatfield, J.D. 1985, “An empirical examination of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and profitability’, Academy of Management Journal 28: 458
Allouche, J. and Laroche, P. (2006). “The Relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Financial Performance”: A Survey, In: Allouche, J. ed., “Corporate Social Responsibility: Performance and Stakeholders”. Palgrave MacMillan, Basingstoke, pp. 3–40.
Berland, P.S. 2010. “Corporate Social Responsibility Branding Survey. Publication”.
Bråtenius, A.L.H. 2015, “The Impact of CSR on Financial Performance”.
Parket, IR., Eilbirt, H. 1975. “Social responsibility: the underlying factors”. Business Horizons;18(4):5–10.
Carroll, A B. 1999. “Corporate social responsibility evolution of a definitional construct”. Business & society, 38(3), 268-295.
Carter, CR., Kale, R. & Grimm, CM. 2000. “Environmental purchasing and firm performance: an empirical investigation”. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 36(3), 219-228.
Cone communications 2010, “ Cone cause evolution study”.
Carter, CR. and Carter, JR. 1998. “Interorganizational determinants of environmental purchasing: initial evidence from the consumer products industry”. Decision Sciences 29 (3), 659-684.
Crowther, D. & Aras, G. 2008, “Corporate social responsibility”
European Commission, 2015. “Non-financial reporting”. http://ec.europa.eu/finance/accounting/non-financial_reporting/index_en.htm. 2015- 04-04. Retrieved: 2015-04-08.
Ehsan, S., Kaleem, A., & Jabeen, S. (2012). “Exploring the interaction between Financial Performance and Corporate Social Responsibility in Pakistani Firms”. J. Basic. Appl. Sci. , vol 2(10), 10431-10439.
El Ghoul, S., Guedhami, O., Kwok, CC. & Mishra, DR. 2011. “Does corporate social responsibility affect the cost of capital?”. Journal of Banking & Finance, 35(9), 2388-2406.
Freeman, R. E. (1984). “Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach, Boston, Mass.: Pitman/Ballinger”
Frooman, J. 1997. “Socially irresponsible and illegal behavior and shareholder wealth”. Business and Society 36 (3), 221–249.
Frederick, W. (2006). “Corporation, be good! The story of corporate social responsibility”. Indianapolis: Dog Ear Publishing.
Friedman, M. (1970). “The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits”. New York Times Magazine, 13 September, pp. 32-33.
Golob, U & Bartlett, JL 2007. “Communicating about corporate social responsibility: A comparative study of CSR reporting in Australia and Slovenia”. Public Relations Review, 33(1), 1-9.
Guerard, Jr. JB., Stone, BK. and Andrews, S. 1988, “Corporate R&D expenditures, innovation, and competition in an international economy”. In: Shrieves R, editor. Competition in the international economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; p. 215–50.
Hassel, L., Nilsson, H. & Nyquist, S., 2005. “The value relevance of environmental performance”. European Accounting Review, 14 (1): 41-61.
Hay, RD., Gray, ER., Gates, JE., 1976, “Business and society”: cases and text. Cincinnati: South-Wester
Kotler, P. and Lee, N. 2005. “Corporate Social Responsibility: Doing the Most Good for Your Company and Your Cause”. Hoboken, N.J: Wiley, 37.
Klassen, RD. and McLaughlin, CP. 1996. “The impact of environmental management on firm performance”. Management Science 42 (8), 1199-1214.
Lin, C H., Yang, HL. & Liou, DY. 2008. “The impact of corporate social responsibility on financial performance: Evidence from business in Taiwan”. Technology in Society, 31(1), 56-63.
LINH, N. T., & HIEU, P. D. (2011). “Impacts of Corporate Social Responsibility On The Financial Performance of The Firms”. 1-38.
Lantos, G. P. (2001). “The Boundaries of Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility”. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18 (7), pp. 595-630.
Lin, C H, Yang, HL & Liou, DY 2009. “The impact of corporate social responsibility on financial performance: Evidence from business in Taiwan”. Technology in Society, 31(1), 56-63.
Moskowitz, MR. 1972. “Choosing socially responsible stocks. Business and Society Review” 1 (1), 71-75.
Madrakhimova, F.S., UONA, 2013: “EVOLUTION OF THE CONCEPT AND DEFINITION OF CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY”.
McWilliams, A., Siegel, D. and Wright, P. 2006. “Corporate Social Responsibility: Strategic Implications*”. J Management Studies, 43 (1): 1-18.
McWilliams, A. & Siegel, D. 2001. “Corporate Social Responsibility: A Theory of the Firm Perspective”. Academy of Management Review, 26 (1): 117-127.
McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. 2000. “Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: Correlation or misspecification? Strategic Management Journal”, 21(5), 603–609.
McGuire, JB., Sundgren, A. and Schneeweis, T. 1988. “Corporate social responsibility and firm financial performance”. Academy of Management Journal;31(6): 854–72.
Moskowitz, MR. 1972. “Choosing socially responsible stocks. Business and Society Review”;1(1):71–5.
McGuire, JB., Sundgren, A. and Schneeweis, T. 1988. “Corporate social responsibility and firm financial performance”. Academy of Management Journal;31(6): 854–72.
Mishra, S., & Suar, D. (2010). “Does Corporate Social Responsibility Influence Firm Performance of Indian Companies”. Journal of Business Ethics , 571-601.
Matten, J. Moon, & D. S. Siegel (Eds.), “The Oxford Handbook of CSR. Oxford, UK”: Oxford University Press. 121.
Najah, A. Jarboui, A. 2013, “The Social Disclosure Impact on Corporate Financial Performance”: Case of Big French Companies.
Orlitzky, M. (2008). “Corporate social performance and financial performance”: A research synthesis. In A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D.
Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F.L. and Rynes, S.L. 2003. \”Corporate Social and Financial Performance”: A Meta- Analysis.\” Organization Studies 24.3: 403-41.
Palmer, H. P. 2012; “Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance: Does it Pay to Be Good?”, pg 19
Parket, IR. and Eilbirt, H. 1975. “Social responsibility: the underlying factors”. Business Horizons 18 (4), 5-10.
Pava, M. & Krausz, J. 1996. “The association between corporate social-responsibility and financial performance: The paradox of social cost”. Journal of Business Ethics, 15 (3): 321-357.
Quazi, A. M. (2003). “Identifying the Determinants of Corporate Managers Perceived Social Obligations”. Management Decision,41 (9), pp. 822-831.
Roberts, R. (1992). “Determinants of Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure: An Application of Stakeholder Theory”. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17 (6), pp. 595-612.
Smith, R. E., 2011, “Defining Corporate Social Responsibility: A Systems Approach For Socially Responsible Capitalism” Pg 1-2.
Sturdivant, FD., Ginter, JL. 1977. “Corporate social responsiveness: management attitudes and economic performance”. California Management Review; 19(3):30–9.
Solomon, R. and Hanson, K. 1985. “It’s Good Business”. Atheneum, New York.
Simpson, WG. & Kohers, T. 2002. “The link between corporate social and financial performance: evidence from the banking industry”. Journal of Business Ethics, 35(2), 97-109.
Tsoutsoura, M. (2004). “Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance”. Working Paper, Haas School of Business, University of California.
Ullman, A. 1985, Data in search of a theory: “a critical examination of the relationship among social performance, social disclosure, and economic performance”. Academy of Management Review;10(3):540–77.
Vance, S. 1975, “Are socially responsible corporations good investment risks?” Managerial Review;64(8):18–24.
Weber, M. 2008. “The Business Case for Corporate social responsibility: A company- level measurement approach for CSR”. European Management Journal, 26: 247-261.
Waddock, SA. & Graves, SB. 1997. “The corporate social performance-financial performance link.” Strategic Management Journal, 18 (4): 303-319.
...(download the rest of the essay above)