11.pp.0276www.iiste.org call for paper-295

Issues in Social and Environmental Accounting
Vol. 1, No. 2 December 2007
Pp 276-295

The Opinions of European Companies on
Corporate Social Responsibility and Its
Relation to Innovation
M. Victoria López-Pérez
Mª Carmen Perez-Lopez
Lazaro Rodriguez-Ariza
Faculty of Business Administration
University of Granada, Spain

Abstract

In recent years there has been greater concern among companies to include responsible prac-
tices in their goals. To achieve this aim, companies are beginning to manage economic, social
and environmental factors following socially responsible practices. Adopting a strategy of Cor-
porate Social Responsibility (CSR) may influence the different policies implemented by the
company, one of which is that regarding innovation. In this study, we analyze the opinions of
95 European companies, 42 of which form part of the Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI)
and 53 of which belong to the Dow Jones General Index (DJGI), concerning their CSR policy,
the innovation carried out and the relation between the two concepts. Our results show that the
DJSI companies, unlike those belonging to the DJGI, consider their CSR strategy to be a key
factor in generating competitive advantages and profits. Moreover, the companies surveyed
have implemented innovations that are more incremental than radical, and these innovation
practices are found to be influenced by CSR strategies.

Keywords: Corporate Social Responsibility, Innovation, Resource and Capabilities Theory,
European Companies, Competitive Advantages, Environmental Aspects, Incremental Innova-
tions, Radical Innovations.

1. Introduction begins to demand practices of corporate
social responsibility. As this occurs,
In the last few decades, the goals that companies need to take steps and con-
companies set out to achieve have been sider this question in formulating their
expanding; the operations carried out strategies. Thus, the practices of corpo-
may affect part of society such that it rate social responsibility are coming to
M. Victoria López-Pérez is Lecturer at Department of Economics and Financial Accounting, Faculty of Business Ad-
ministration, University of Granada, Spain, email: mvlopez@ugr.es. Mª Carmen Perez-Lopez is Lecturer at Faculty of
Business Administration, University of Granada, Spain, email: marialo@ugr.es. Lazaro Rodriguez-Ariza is Chair
Professor at University of Granada, Spain, email: lazaro@ugr.es

M.V. Lopez, M.C. Perez, L. Rodriguez / Issues in Social and Environmental Accounting 2 (2007) 276-295 277

form part of business culture. The crite- sues:
ria of corporate responsibility include a) their attitude with respect to CSR
economic and environmental elements, policies,
together with that of social responsibility b) the policy developed with regard to
(Hedstrom et al., 1998; Bansal, 2005). innovation, and
Therefore, practices related to environ- c) the relation between these two as-
mental and social goals are frequently pects.
contained in the set of strategies known
The aim of this study is to analyze the
as the Corporate Social Responsibility
behaviour of companies concerning
(CSR) of companies (Adams & Zutshi,
these questions, but not the result of
2004:34; King, 2002).
such behaviour.
CSR is a broad concept that includes Research into the adoption of CSR prac-
aspects related to economic, social and tices by European companies is still at
environmental spheres (the “triple bot- an embryonic stage (McWilliams et al.,
tom line”) (Carroll, 1999; Boatright, 2006), as the application of CSR policies
1993). The adoption of CSR practices by these companies, as well as the fol-
may produce a cultural change among lowing of sustainability guidelines, is a
companies. To the extent that they con- relatively recent phenomenon in Europe
cern, among other aspects, reducing (Cetindamar & Husoy, 2007). This ex-
companies’ environmental footprint, as plains the interest that may be provoked
well as improving safety, businesses by studies such as the present.
need to adapt their activities, organiza- The paper is organized as follows: Sec-
tional structures, processes and products tion 2 presents the background concern-
to bring them into line with CSR poli- ing CSR and innovation in companies,
cies, bearing in mind the possible need together with the hypotheses that are
to implement innovation-based activities tested in this study. The following sec-
(Castelo & Lima, 2006:121; Slowinski tion describes the methodology used,
et al., 1997). McWilliams & Siegel after which Section 4 provides some
(2001) established, from a theoretical comments on the results obtained, and
standpoint, that CSR-oriented differen- finally, Section 5 draws the main con-
tiation may require investment in re- clusions of the study.
search and development. In addition,
according to Hart & Milstein (2003),
innovation is one of the key factors un- 2. CSR and innovation. Working hy-
derlying the achievement of CSR objec- potheses
tives and ensuring a company’s continu-
ity. The consideration of CSR as an element
that adds value to companies represents
In order to make an empirical study of a change of philosophy in the business
the incidence of CSR practices on com- world. The concept of CSR can be con-
panies, we analyzed the opinions of a set sidered from many standpoints, and in
of European companies that follow CSR this study we examine CSR in the sense
practices, and of others that do not con- of the types of behaviour or ethical prac-
sider them relevant to their strategies, tices followed by a company in response
with special regard to the following is- to market forces or legal restrictions, and

278 M.V. Lopez, M.C. Perez, L. Rodriguez / Issues in Social and Environmental Accounting 2 (2007) 276-295

in consequence with its ethical princi- companies have been considered to gen-
ples (Carroll, 1999). In our view, busi- erate competitive advantages over time
ness activity involves the performance on the basis of the good use made of
of a series of processes and we believe resources when these are valuable,
companies can consider themselves re- scarce, and impossible to substitute or
sponsible for the results and impacts copy (Barney, 1995:56). For Hoopes et
derived from their activity (Wartick & al. (2003:890), inimitability is the most
Cochran, 1985). This approach is con- significant characteristic, and for Barney
tained in the framework of one of the (2001:45), it is the most important con-
currents of opinion concerning CSR ini- tribution of the resource-based approach.
tiated in the late 1990s, the object of
which was to measure the initiatives For many people, CSR strategies repre-
adopted in this field (Carroll, 1999). Dif- sent the greatest opportunity currently
ferent companies normally define the available to the business world. Oppor-
content of their explicit preferences as tunities are of various types, and include
regards CSR issues and these prefer- avoiding the threats to growth posed by
ences will lead to the adoption of spe- operational restrictions, and achieving
cific decisions and actions (Wood, greater success through new products
1991). Thus, we believe that the adop- and new technologies (Hedstrom et al.,
tion of CSR policies involves a change 1998:5). Costs can be reduced, risks
of culture and philosophy among com- lessened, sales growth promoted or mar-
panies, as they incorporate ethical crite- ket share increased, by means of product
ria into their actions, which affect their innovation (Hart & Milstein, 2003) and
code of business practice. by seeking a client profile with an un-
derstanding of CSR objectives
There are a large number of theoretical (McWilliams & Siegel, 2001). Many of
standpoints from which CSR may be these actions may require innovations. In
studied (McWilliams et al., 2006); in the this respect, we believe that innovation
present paper, we take as a basic frame- in the business world can be studied
work the theory of resources and capaci- from the standpoint of CSR-based prac-
ties (Wernerfelt, 1984). The resource- tices.
based approach has become the pre-
dominant paradigm in research into In general, we may say that in Europe,
management strategy (Peteraf, 1993). In CSR practices are focused on proactive
accordance with this latter perspective, it policies related to the environment and
is perfectly foreseeable that CSR criteria human resources (Social Investment Fo-
will influence companies’ decisions and rum, 2003:39). This leads us to consider
actions. that the strategies developed by compa-
nies will to a large extent be related to
According to the resource and capacity- the fulfilment of requirements of an en-
based approach, the earnings of the com- vironmental nature, such as reducing
panies within a given business sector can emissions, obtaining energy savings,
be accounted for on the basis of the dif- producing lower quantities of waste mat-
ferences in their resource provisions ter and making provisions for its recy-
(Barney, 1986a, 1986b, 1991; Peteraf, cling. In addition, it will be necessary to
1993; Wernerfelt, 1984). Traditionally, search for other technologies that will


enable companies to reach their CSR of the factors that poses greatest diffi-
goals. culty for management. As discussed be-
low, studying technology, from the CSR
In the light of these considerations, we standpoint, can facilitate its analysis.
studied the concern for CSR among Innovation is fundamental to value crea-
companies, their policies on disclosure, tion, fostering company competitiveness
and how CSR is put into practice. Thus, and productivity (Achrol & Kotler,
we were able to distinguish companies 1999; Badaracco, 1991). Organizations
with serious concern for CSR issues that decide to introduce innovation crite-
from those that did not consider CSR ria into some or all aspects of the busi-
relevant to their strategies. Subse- ness increase their opportunities and
quently, we studied specific aspects, competitive advantages in the market
such as the incidence of CSR on the gen- (Trillo & Pedraza, 2007: 1419).
eration of competitive advantages and of
company results, together with aspects Innovation can be viewed as a measure
of particular importance to these compa- of the application of knowledge (Balkin
nies, with special reference to the ques- et al., 2000; Díaz et al., 2004; Soo et al.,
tion of the environment. 2002). By means of innovation, it is pos-
sible to achieve changes in technology,
Therefore, the following three hypothe- comprising the materialization of poten-
ses were proposed: tially profit-generating ideas in products,
processes or services (Muñoz et al.,
H1. The companies that imple-
2007).
ment CSR practices are more likely than
those that do not to consider CSR strat-
Dory (2005) claimed that innovation can
egy to be a key factor in the generation
be considered an effective exploitation
of competitive advantages.
of new ideas, using a foundation of ex-
H2. The companies that imple- isting knowledge to create new products
ment CSR practices consider it to have a and services, or to develop existing ones.
positive effect on company results. Innovation requires a social process of
H3. The companies that imple- knowledge and resource exchange, to-
ment CSR practices consider, unlike gether with the learning of the necessary
those that do not, CSR strategy to in- competences, derived from interactions
volve a consideration of environmental with interested parties.
aspects.
In a similar line, Goh (2005) relates in-
Obtaining competitive advantages is novation to knowledge, observing that
related to the use made of resources in companies must create knowledge, new
which CSR strategies play a relevant ideas and good management practices in
role. As remarked above, innovation order to innovate effectively. This author
may be one of the scarce, inimitable re- believes it is possible to obtain advan-
sources on which a company relies to tages from innovation in knowledge, but
achieve these types of advantages. that to do so it is necessary to identify,
create and acquire new knowledge on a
Technology plays a crucial role in a continual basis, and also to foster an at-
company’s competitiveness, and is one mosphere of collaboration, both within


the organization and outside it. Compa- in which to be achieved. Faced with a
nies, as well as gaining knowledge from new phenomenon and a cultural change,
their own experience, learn constantly it is necessary to create a knowledge
from their relations with diverse external base enabling the company subsequently
sources (Freeman, 1987). to develop an incremental innovation.

Technological innovations can be The sources of technological knowledge
classed as either radical or incremental. are those data accumulated by compa-
Radical innovations are those that give nies, which remain within the organiza-
rise to products or processes that are not tion in a more or less stable form, and
based on prior technological knowledge which have the potential to create value
or on transmitted knowledge (Tushman when appropriately exploited and incor-
& Anderson, 1986). Radical innovations porated, more or less immediately, into
generate new knowledge that may fa- technologically innovative products and/
vour continual innovation (Knott, 2003). or processes (Tripsas, 1997; Yli-Renko
This type of innovation involves a rup- et al., 2001; Matusik, 2002; Zahra &
ture with current technological thinking Nielsen, 2002). Initially, companies will
(Gatignon et al., 2004) and involves a adapt existing processes to the cultural
higher degree of uncertainty with respect changes, and so we believe that the inno-
to the success achieved from the invest- vations in this case will mainly be of the
ments made. The goal of incremental incremental type. Therefore, we propose
innovations is to develop already- the following hypothesis:
existing technologies. Experience with
H4. Companies that implement
certain technologies leads to a greater
CSR practices introduce innovations that
capacity for absorption and to greater
are more incremental than radical.
competitiveness in the use of such tech-
nologies, by enabling the organization to
elaborate specialized capabilities The strategies of CSR can mean that
(Muñoz et al., 2007). companies evolve from protection-
oriented measures to a redesign of their
In the present study, we seek to deter- activities, taking into account new tech-
mine whether companies base their pre- nologies (Bansal, 2002). From the stand-
sent innovations on earlier ones (i.e. in- point of CSR, the measures adopted may
cremental innovation) or whether they produce changes in processes, such as
carry out innovation of a radical type. In reducing the environmental impact, in-
addition, we examine the question of creasing safety or enabling the recycling
whether there are significant differences of materials; they may also affect prod-
concerning the type of innovation car- ucts, for example by improving the qual-
ried out (incremental or radical) in com- ity of the materials employed. Innova-
panies that follow CSR policies, with tion influences the efficient use made of
respect to those that do not consider energy, and may reduce the volume of
CSR to be relevant to their strategies. materials consumed (Bansal, 2002:128).
Although a cultural change such as that Thus, actions taken in accordance with
involved in incorporating CSR policies CSR criteria sometimes involve changes
may require radical innovations, we be- in products that may be toxic, in proc-
lieve the latter need a longer time frame esses, and even, in some cases, may give


rise to a change in the company’s activ- whether concern for CSR by companies
ity. Hence, in the longer term, some influences the innovation they carry out;
firms evolve and carry out radical with this in mind, we analyze the type of
changes, repositioning themselves by the innovation in which concern for CSR is
transformation of their activities towards materialized. It is also of interest to
others that reduce their impact on the study the existence of differences with
environment; such is the case, for exam- companies that do not share this concern
ple, of the companies Dupont and Mon- for CSR. Taking these aims into ac-
santo. count, we propose the following hy-
pothesis:
Traditionally, various types of innova-
H5. Companies that implement
tion have been identified: product inno-
CSR practices are of the opinion that
vation, process innovation, market inno-
adopting such practices influences the
vation, input innovation and organiza-
innovations made.
tional innovation (Schumpeter, 1934).
However, recent empirical studies nor-
mally distinguish two types, those of 3. Methodology
product and process innovation This study is focused on European firms,
(Sherman et al., 2000; Chryssochoidis where the degree of disclosure of CSR
and Wong, 2000; Di Benedetto, 1999). strategies is fairly homogeneous, as
According to Trillo & Pedraza (2007: companies normally follow standard
1422), product innovation is that which guidelines and indexes in drawing up
introduces changes at some stage of the their reports (Doh & Guay, 2006).
production process and commercializa-
tion of the product; it may affect the
product’s design, composition or presen- To test the hypotheses, we drew up a
tation to the market. On the other hand, questionnaire of 27 items, grouped into
process innovation focuses on the way in three blocks. The first of these was
which the product innovation is per- aimed at revealing the company’s atti-
ceived and implemented, and influences tude toward CSR. The second block was
the stages of product conception, crea- focused on its innovation strategy and
tion, research, development, production practices, and the third one was con-
and commercialization, as well as the cerned with the relation between these
way in which these areas are interre- two concepts. The full questionnaire is
lated. Innovation – especially as it af- provided in Annexe 1. Our intention
fects products – is recognised as a key with this questionnaire was to obtain
element in the process of value creation data on business attitudes towards these
(Han et al., 1998; Weerawardena, 2003). aspects. The items in the questionnaire
were measured on a 5-point Likert scale
In this study, we take it that CSR strate- (the Likert scale grades replies from 5
gies involve a concern for environmental (highest) to 1 (lowest)), and the popula-
and social aspects. We set out as one of tion was comprised of European compa-
our goals that of determining whether it nies listed on the Dow Jones World In-
is necessary to make an innovation- dex, specifically the Dow Jones General
based effort in relation to such strate- Index (DJGI)1 and the Dow Jones Sus-
gies. This would involve investigating tainability Index (DJSI), in the under-


standing that among the companies in- indexes developed in Europe5 and the
cluded in these two indexes there exist DJSI takes into account the adoption of
differences with respect to the obser- business practices based on CSR as a
vance of CSR practices. The DJSI is strategic decision capable of influencing
calculated from data on firms that par- the firm’s profitability (Husted and Sala-
ticipate in the DJGI. The DJSI is made zar, 2006).
up of firms that are leaders in CSR prac-
tices and are among the top 10% of the We sent the questionnaire to all the
firms in the DJGI. European companies quoted on the DJSI
and DJGI: 113 European companies be-
The DJSI is a multi-dimensional con- longing to the DJSI (these firms follow
struct intended to enable the measure- and disclose CSR practices and observe
ment of CSR practices; it is based on the economic, environmental and social
economic, social and environmental in- criteria required by the Sustainable As-
dicators, and enjoys broad social back- set Management Group (SAM)), and
ing. Although some studies have em- 1084 European companies included
ployed other multi-dimensional meas- within the DJGI in the period of our
ures (McWilliams & Siegel, 2000; study. These companies are non-
Wenzel & Thiewes, 1999; Griffin & financial firms; for the firms belonging
Mahon, 1997; Stanwick & Stanwick, to the DJSI we examined the companies
1998), we selected the DJSI because its that had been included in this index from
requirements concerning CSR are more its constitution.
comprehensive2 than those applied by
other indexes of sustainability3 We sent the questionnaire by e-mail,
(SustAinability, 2004) and are similar to addressed to the Chair of the Board. The
those proposed in the CSR guides - the first such mailing took place in October
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and 2006, followed later by a reminder. Re-
the Global Compact4. The DJSI includes ception of replies was closed at the end
innovation among the parameters con- of March 2007. The CSR outlook of the
sidered and it was initiated in 1999, on companies examined is supplemented
the basis of firms that had met the re-
quirements of the index during 1998. ASPI Eurozone Indexes, the Citizens Index and the
KLD-Nasdaq Social Index.
This index is prior to that of the other 4
Global Reporting Initiative is a “Sustainability Report-
ing Guideline" for voluntary use by organisations re-
1
This index is now termed the Dow Jones Wilshire porting on the economic, environmental and social
Global Index. impacts. Sustainability reporting is the practice of meas-
2
The DJSI includes indicators on the following dimen- uring, disclosing, and being accountable to internal and
sions: corporate governance, investor relations, manage- external stakeholders for organizational performance
ment, codes of conduct, customer relations, environ- towards the goal of sustainable development. The
mental policy and performance, labour practice, human Global Pact is a UN-sponsored international initiative. It
capital development, talent attraction and retention, is aimed at encouraging firms to make a voluntary com-
organizational learning, standards for suppliers, stake- mitment to social responsibility, via the adoption of the
holder engagement, corporate philanthropy and social Ten Principles based on human, occupational and envi-
reporting. ronmental rights and on the fight against corruption.
5
3
Other indexes that have been created upon criteria of Although the companies that comprise the DJSI Stoxx
sustainability include the FTSE4Good and the Domini are European, this Index was set up in 2001 and so is
Social Index (KLD). These have been developed by not suitable for the purposes of the present study. The
organizations of acknowledged standing and have lent FTSE4GOOD database was created in 2002. The
credibility to investment in companies that follow crite- Domini Social Index was established in 1990 and is a
ria of sustainability. More recent additions include the reference point for investment in sustainability for US
companies.


with a review of the information dis- 13), there are significant differences,
closed on the subject of CSR, in the p<0.01, between the DJSI and the DJGI
form of CSR reports or the companies’ companies. The former show a higher
annual reports. The final sample was degree of agreement with the questions
made up of 95 companies, 42 of which concerning CSR than do the DJGI com-
form part of the DJSI, while 53 belong panies. In the case of the DJGI compa-
to the DJGI. The response rates were nies, we observed a higher degree of
37% for the DJSI firms and 5% for DJGI dispersion among replies than with the
firms. The response rate for DJSI was DJSI companies, which reflects greater
higher than that for the DJGI companies, differences of opinion on the question of
which could be an indicator of the inter- CSR among DJGI companies than
est among the former companies in dis- among DJSI companies.
closing the effort they make with respect
to CSR. In addition, in order to determine
whether the initial classification was
appropriate, a cluster analysis was car-
4. Results ried out of the companies that had com-
pleted the questionnaire, to sort them
The questionnaire results are shown in into homogeneous groups. The K-means
Table 1, which is divided into three non-hierarchic grouping method was
blocks. For each question, we show the applied to the responses to the questions
mean score and the standard deviation related to CSR. The companies, thus,
obtained for the two groups of compa- were sorted into two groups, one com-
nies studied (DJSI and DJGI). In addi- prising the DJSI companies and the
tion, in order to determine the degree of other with those belonging to the DJGI.
differentiation in the replies between the The results of the cluster analysis con-
two groups of companies, the final col- firmed the original classification of the
umn shows the results of the T test. companies into two groups – DJSI and
DJGI. This classification, therefore, was
In this study, we make an initial distinc- considered an appropriate one.
tion between companies that belong to
the DJSI and those that belong to the It is quite clear that the DJSI companies
DJGI, in the supposition that the two are concerned about CSR-related issues.
differ with respect to CSR practices. These companies consider CSR to be a
This hypothesis is tested by examination very important aspect of their activities
of the questionnaire results and by (item 1).This degree of importance as-
analysis of the information disclosed by cribed to CSR by DJSI companies has
the companies (Annual Report)6. As can grown in recent years (item 4); in most
be seen in Table 1 (Panel A), for the cases, it is determined, moreover, by the
questions related to the company’s de- Board of Directors, which makes it one
gree of commitment to CSR (Items 1- of the strategic factors on which compa-
nies base their actions, which confirms
6
In general, the information contained in company
the statement to this effect by Husted
reports corresponds to that in the replies received, which and Salazar (2006). Moreover, the DJSI
leads us to believe that company strategies concerning companies consider CSR strategy to be a
CSR correspond to their opinions expressed by their key
executives. key factor in generating competitive ad-


vantages (Item 2), with a mean score with a mean score of 2.9. Therefore,
assigned in this respect of 4.64. This from an empirical standpoint, hypothesis
opinion is in line with positions de- H1 is confirmed for the companies ex-
fended from a theoretical standpoint amined in this study.
(Husted and Salazar, 2006; Adams and
Zutshi, 2004; King, 2002). On the con- In addition, and concerning company
trary, the DJGI companies did not pre- management, the DJSI companies be-
sent an agreed opinion on this issue, lieve that the CSR strategy is aimed at
Table 1. Panel A. Statistics of the questionnaire results concerning CSR

DJSI Firms DJGI Firms
T-test
Standard Standard (p-value)
Mean Mean
Deviation Deviation
CSR
1. CSR is a very important concern for your com-
pany 4.73 0.47 2.85 0.97 0.001**

2. In your company, the CSR strategy is a key fac-
tor in generating competitive advantages 4.64 0.67 2.90 1.00 0.000**

3. In your company, the CSR strategy is aimed at
creating future business opportunities, such as 3.91 0.83 2.85 0.90 0.007**
opening up new market sectors
4. In your company, the importance of CSR has
increased in recent years 4.64 0.67 3.38 0.77 0.000**
5. The company follows a policy of disclosure with
respect to its CSR practices 4.91 0.30 3.38 0.87 0.000**

6. The edition of CSR Guides has helped determine
the aspects of CSR that are disclosed by your com- 4.82 0.40 3.23 1.30 0.001**
pany
7. Adoption of the CSR strategy involves taking
environmental aspects into consideration. 4.82 0.40 2.77 0.83 0.000**
8. The disclosure of CSR practices in your company
is related to the demands of stakeholders (investors, 4.82 0.40 2.54 0.66 0.000**
institutions, clients, etc.) in this respect
9. The adoption of CSR practices in your company
has a value added effect for stakeholders (profits,
remuneration, working environment, product qual- 4.82 0.40 2.77 1.01 0.000**
ity, etc.)
10. The CSR strategy depends on or is supervised
or drawn up by the Board of Directors 4.64 0.50 2.92 0.95 0.000**
11. The CSR practices in your company are au-
dited / certified / confirmed by external agencies 4.73 0.47 2.31 1.38 0.000**
has a positive effect on the company’s short-term
results (reductions in costs, increases in sales, etc.) 4.00 0.77 2.15 0.38 0.000**

has a positive effect on the company’s long-term
results (new market sectors, change of activity, etc.) 4.55 0.69 3.15 1.14 0.002**

** p< 0.01


creating future business opportunities, of the capital market on which they are
such as opening up new market sectors quoted, pressure by stakeholders or the
(item 3); however, this latter item is wish to improve the company’s reputa-
given a lower score (mean score 3.91) tion.
than the capacity of CSR to generate
competitive advantages. Thus, adopting With respect to the influence of CSR
CSR practices does influence the man- practices on company results (items 12
agement of these companies, by generat- and 13), the DJSI companies consider
ing competitive advantages and creating that the effect of these practices on their
future business opportunities. own results will be positive, and this is
borne out in the literature (López et al.
The appearance of CSR guidelines has 2007; Simpson & Kohers, 2002), al-
made it possible to establish yardsticks though the respondents seem to expect
and thus indicators enabling the manage- these results to be greater in the long
ment and measurement of results. These term (4.55) than in the short term (4.00).
guidelines also enable companies to sys- These scores enable us to accept hy-
tematize the information disclosed so pothesis H2. More immediately, many of
that it is comparable, while at the same the practices related to CSR are aimed at
time they help bring about standardised meeting current legal requirements in
CSR measures for use as a management the environmental field or concern hu-
tool. Systematization and the establish- man resources, which may lead to cost
ing of standards means that practices can reductions by rationalizing the use of
be audited or certified externally, a pol- resources, or improving technologies
icy that is followed by most of the DJSI and motivating staff, reducing staff turn-
companies (items 5 and 6). The disclo- over or improving their productivity. It
sure of information can be employed as seems reasonable that CSR strategies
a political tool to avoid social pressure should be more effective in the long
(Parker, 1986:76). term, as their influence may well be on
the company as a whole; furthermore,
Unlike the DJSI companies, the DJGI technologies may be developed in accor-
companies do not believe CSR to be dance with the company goals set out. It
very important for their business (item 1, might be necessary for a certain period
mean score 2.85), although they do state of time to elapse to demonstrate that
that the importance of CSR has grown in CSR involves a cultural change that will
recent years, and are considering follow- be gradually be brought about. We be-
ing a policy of disclosure with respect to lieve that CSR policies need time to be-
their CSR practices (items 2 and 4, mean come consolidated and to begin to pro-
score 3.38). It can be said that the moti- duce results (Lee et al., 1996; Brown &
vation among these companies to adopt Svenson, 1998; Souitaris, 2002).
and disclose CSR practices does not
arise from the fact that they consider Although the DJSI companies consider
CSR to be a key factor in generating CSR practices to influence company
competitive advantages (item 3, mean results, they report with greater empha-
score 2.90). Disclosing this information, sis (mean score 4.82) that the adoption
hence, must be due to some other kind of CSR practices is related to demands
of motivation, such as the requirements from stakeholders (item 8) and that it


produces added value for them (item 9). DJSI ones. For the latter, the adoption of
The results related to stakeholders CSR practices constitutes a strategic de-
(profits, remuneration, working environ- cision that will influence diverse com-
ment or product quality) can be consid- pany policies (innovation, human re-
ered short term effects. It is confirmed sources, communication with stake-
that companies’ decisions to follow CSR holders) and will require information to
practices are motivated by factors of be obtained on these aspects so that they
business (Williamson et al., 2006), but may be appropriately addressed. For the
they also consider these practices to DJGI companies, however, CSR does
have greater effects on stakeholders in not comprise a strategic factor in their
the short term. management, and its effects on company
results are not important. It may be said
The opinions of the DJGI companies that among the DJGI companies there is
differ significantly from those of the growing interest in disclosing informa-

Table 1. Panel B. Statistics of the survey results concerning innovation.

DJSI Firms DJGI Firms
T-test
Standard Standard (p-value)
Mean Mean
Deviation Deviation
INNOVATION
14. Your company develops its own technology and
3.85 0.60 4.62 0.77 0.000**
does not externalize R+D+I activity
15. Current innovation in your company is grounded
upon prior innovation (incremental innovation) 4.64 0.50 3.85 0.55 0.002**

16. The innovation policy in your company is ori-
3.55 0.93 3.15 1.07 0.354
ented towards inventions (radical innovation)
17. In the innovation carried out in your company,
4.55 0.38 3.82 0.60 0.000**
environmental aspects are taken into consideration.
18. In your company’s innovation policy, emphasis
is placed on strengthening the capacity to develop 4.09 0.70 3.92 1.04 0.654
new technological capabilities
19. Your company’s innovation policies are focused
4.73 0.47 4.31 0.85 0.161
on products
20. Your company’s innovation policies are focused
4.45 0.93 3.31 0.95 0.007**
on processes
** P <0.01.

tion on CSR practices, even though this On the other hand, the DJSI companies
disclosure is of a voluntary nature, but stated that the adoption of CSR strate-
both in the reports that are published and gies involves the consideration of envi-
in the replies to the questionnaires, the ronmental aspects (item 7). Environ-
adoption of CSR practices does not seem mental issues form part of the concept of
to be related to business results (items CSR, together with economic and social
12 and 13) or to the demands of stake- aspects (the “triple bottom line”), and so
holders (item 8). it is to be expected that they should be
associated with the company’s CSR


strategy. In addition, let us note that al- With respect to the questions concerning
though the adoption of CSR practices is innovation (Items 14-20. Panel B), the
a voluntary issue (EC, 2001, 2002; DTI, DJSI and the DJGI companies awarded
2001), companies must observe a series similar average scores and in some items
of legal obligations in environmental there were no significant differences
matters. between the two groups. Specifically,
both the DJSI and the DJGI companies
The DJGI companies, on the other hand, agreed in their perception of the radical
do not consider environmental issues to innovation carried out, in the develop-
be so important with respect to CSR ment of technological competence and
strategies. Moreover, the differences in in the fact that their innovation is mainly
the responses by the two groups of com- product oriented. In the remaining items
panies are significant. As we remarked in this block of questions, the opinions
above, innovation policies may respond of the two groups of companies differed
to many different strategies, and in the significantly.
case of companies that do not manifest a
concern for CSR, they consider that en- The DJSI companies implemented inno-
vironmental questions are not especially vation that was mainly of an incremental
related to the CSR strategy adopted by type, and thus hypothesis H4 is accepted.
the company. Therefore, hypothesis H3 The companies consider that better re-
is accepted. sults are obtained in areas in which the

Table 1. Panel C. Statistics of the survey results concerning the relation between
CSR and innovation.
CSR AND INNOVATION

21. Your company’s innovation policies are related
to its strategies of sustainability 4.91 0.30 3.00 0.82 0.000**

22. The adoption of CSR criteria has led to a change
in the company’s policies regarding innovation 4.55 0.52 2.85 0.90 0.000**

23. The adoption of CSR criteria has led to in-
creased expenditure on innovation 4.36 0.50 2.62 0.77 0.000**
24. The adoption of CSR criteria has led to techno-
logical changes in its production processes 4.73 0.47 3.08 1.04 0.000**

logical changes that affect the quality of its products 4.91 0.30 3.38 0.87 0.000**
(design, quality, etc.)
logical changes that affect the range of products that 4.73 0.65 2.69 0.95 0.000**
are marketed
logical variations that represent a radical change in
the company’s principal activity 1.82 0.60 1.38 0.87 0.178

** P <0.01.


appropriate fundamental research has agreement about the relation between
been developed (Clemens & Row, CSR and companies’ policies on innova-
1991). Furthermore, these companies tion. In fact, there are significant differ-
reinforce their capability to develop new ences in the responses of the two groups
technological competences and present a of companies in question, for all the
certain degree of agreement on develop- items listed in Panel C, Table 1, except
ing their own technology rather than the last one, according to which the
resorting to the externalization of re- companies in the two groups believe that
search, development and innovation. CSR strategies do not lead to radical
Their innovation practices are related to changes in the company’s main activity.
environmental aspects. These companies For the DJSI companies, unlike those
develop both product and process- belonging to the DJGI, the adoption of
oriented innovation. CSR practices influences the innovation
carried out and leads to changes in their
The DJGI companies, too, report greater policies on innovation. The DJGI com-
agreement on the implementation of in- panies, we find, do not consider CSR to
cremental rather than radical innovation. be a strategic element on the basis of
The behaviour of these companies re- which their policies should be devel-
flects a preference for developing their oped, which is consistent with the re-
own technology, rather than externaliza- plies made (items 21-27), which ratify
tion, and for reinforcing the develop- the view that their policies with regard
ment of technological competences to to innovation are not created following
ensure ongoing innovation. Among this CSR criteria.
group of companies there is a clear pre-
dominance of product rather than proc- Nevertheless, the replies to this block of
ess-oriented innovation. The most im- questions are of great interest for the
portant difference between DJGI and DJSI companies, as they reveal the link
DJSI was found to be the item concern- between the adoption of CSR practices
ing process-oriented innovation. We and the innovation they have carried out
might conclude that both groups of com- (item 21). CSR criteria involve a change
panies implement innovation strategies, in the innovation policies of these com-
but that the DJSI companies are more panies (item 22). Thus, for the DJSI
inclined than the DJGI ones to opt for companies, CSR is a strategic factor that
process-oriented innovation. This find- affects their policies on innovation.
ing might be due to attempts by these Moreover, although to a lesser degree
companies to reduce the environmental (mean score 4.36), it involves increased
impact of their activities, a subject on expenditure on innovation (item 23).
which there is also a considerable degree
of difference between the DJSI and the The DJSI companies report that the
DJGI companies. adoption of CSR practices has not led to
radical changes in the activities of the
Finally, with regard to the relation be- company (item 27). The CSR practices
tween the adoption of CSR practices and involve the gradual adaptation of exist-
innovation shown in panel C, we found ing products and processes. Companies
that the DJSI companies, unlike the that have adopted CSR criteria report
DJGI ones, presented a high degree of that these have led to changes both in


their products – slightly more in quality In general, our study reveals, from an
(item 25) than in product range (item 26) empirical standpoint, that the DJSI com-
– and processes (item 24). Therefore, panies present a higher degree of agree-
hypothesis H5 is accepted. According to ment on CSR-related topics than do
the information disclosed, the companies those belonging to the DJGI. The adop-
are examining how to reduce the envi- tion of CSR practices becomes a strate-
ronmental impact of their activities, re- gic factor, as can be seen among the
habilitate their surroundings or change DJSI companies, as it affects specific
their processes, but they are not contem- policies, in this case, those concerning
plating a change in the basic activity that innovation. The DJSI firms, taking into
is carried out. Indeed, changes in activ- account CSR, are of the opinion that this
ity, such as those put into practice by strategy is related to gaining competitive
Dupont and Monsanto, are sporadic and advantages, obtaining results in the short
tend to occur in a gradual manner. and long term, and satisfying a series of
Therefore, we see that the adoption of stakeholders’ demands. They recognize
CSR practices by companies involves a the capacity of CSR to create value, and
change of outlook in the use of re- that its possibilities for the future are
sources, in this case, those destined to mainly long term, thus assuring the per-
innovation. manence and future development of
these companies. Moreover, the adop-
tion of CSR practices requires the con-
5. Conclusions sideration of environmental issues, an-
other of the dimensions making up CSR.
The appearance of a new strategy, such This perceived importance might be in-
as concern for CSR, requires a study of fluenced by social pressures and current
the factors by means of which it is to be regulatory measures, although the eco-
applied. Companies’ views in this re- nomic standpoint is also relevant, as
spect provide an initial approach to- CSR may reduce the need for resources
wards determining the behaviour of or favour the use of less contaminating
companies faced with this new reality. resources, with positive effects in the
Therefore, in this study, and taking into short term on the company’s image and
account the recent adoption of CSR even perhaps on its profitability.
practices by European companies, we
have analyzed the opinions of compa- The CSR strategy influences policies
nies that belong to the DJSI, and which and specific practices, affecting the di-
thus demonstrate a concern for CSR, on verse functional areas of the company
the effects of adopting a CSR strategy, and, therefore, the activities it carries out
the innovation they have carried out and and the processes, products or services
the relation between the two concepts. offered. The DJSI companies report that
These opinions were then compared their innovation policies are related to
with those of companies that belong to CSR, with effects both on their products
the DJGI and which do not implement (quality and range) and on their proc-
CSR practices; certain significant differ- esses. This fact, therefore, has important
ences were observed between the two implications for the management of the
groups of companies. activities of these companies. Moreover,
the DJSI companies state that the adop-


tion of CSR criteria leads to greater ex- or on the results obtained by companies
penditure on innovation. in relation to CSR and innovation.

The present study has enabled us to ana- For future lines of research, we are con-
lyze the effects of CSR practices on in- sidering characterizing the innovation
novation among a group of companies carried out by the companies that follow
that consider CSR to be a strategic factor CSR practices and determining whether
for them. Company management is af- this generates competitive advantages,
fected by this issue, although it may be taking for this purpose, indicators of
necessary for a longer period of time to business performance.
elapse before we can determine the real
effect of the adoption of CSR practices,
from an economic-financial and man- References
agement standpoint.
Achrol, R.S. and Kotler, P. (1999)
As concerns the innovation carried out “Marketing in the network
by all the companies in the study, this economy”, Journal of Market-
mainly involves incremental-type inno- ing, Vol. 63 (special issue), pp.
vation, based on prior knowledge. In 146-163.
general, the DJSI and the DJGI compa- Adams, C., Zutshi, A. (2004) “Corporate
nies reported similar views with respect social responsibility: Why busi-
to the questions related to innovation. ness should act responsibly and
They were in agreement that innovation- be accountable”, Australian
based activities are influenced by envi- Accounting Review, Vol. 14, pp.
ronmental aspects and that they are 31-39.
aimed at both products and processes. Badaracco, J. (1991) The knowledge
link: how firms compete through
This study has enabled us to identify the strategic alliances. Boston: Har-
motivations of the DJSI companies for vard Business School Press.
adopting CSR practices, although it re- Balkin, D.B., Markman, G.D. & Gomez-
mains unclear exactly why other compa- Mejia, L.R. (2000) “Is CEO pay
nies, which do not do so, i.e. the DJGI in high-technology firms related
companies, should take an increasing to innovation”, The Academy of
interest in CSR. It may be because of the Management Journal, Vol. 43,
demands made by stock markets, or pp. 1118-1129.
those of stakeholders, or simply a re- Bansal, P. (2002) “The corporate chal-
sponse to trends in the sector in which lenges of sustainable develop-
such companies carry out their activities. ment”, Academy of Manage-
With regard to the limitations of our ment Executive, Vol. 16, pp.
study, these concern especially the use 122-131.
of questionnaires to obtain data on opin- ________ (2005) “Evolving sustainably:
ions. In addition, we focused on the per- a longitudinal study of corpo-
ception by companies of the aspects in rate sustainable development,
question, and not on the specific policies Strategic Management Journal,
and practices that were put into practice Vol. 26, pp. 197-218.
by following a given business strategy, Barney, J.B. (1986a: “Strategic factor


markets: expectations, luck and new product success: mediating
business strategy”, Management effects of new product develop-
Science, Vol. 32, pp. 1231- ment and rollout timeliness”,
1241. The Journal of Product Innova-
_________ (1986b) “Organizational cul- tion Management, Vol. 17, pp.
ture: can it be a source of sus- 268-285.
tained competitive advantage?”, Di Benedetto, C.A. (1999) “Identifying
Academy of Management Re- the key success factors in new
view, Vol. 11, pp. 656-665. product launch”, Journal of
_________ (1991): “Firm resources and Product Innovation Manage-
sustained competitive advan- ment, Vol. 16, pp. 530-544.
tage”, Journal of Management, Díaz, N.L., Aguiar, I. & De Sáa, P.
Vol. 17, pp. 99-120. (2004) “Efecto directo versus
_________ (2001) “Is the resource- indirecto del conocimiento tec-
based “view” a useful perspec- nológico en la performance”,
tive for strategic management XIV Congreso Nacional de
research? Yes”, Academy of ACEDE, Murcia.
Management Review, Vol. 26, Doh, J.P. & Guay, T.R. (2006)
pp. 41-56. “Corporate social responsibility,
Boatright, J.R. (1993) Ethics and the public policy, and NGO activ-
conduct of business. Englewood ism in Europe and the United
Cliffs: Prentice Hall. States: an institutional-
Brown, M.G. & Svenson, R.A. (1998) stakeholder perspective”, Jour-
“Measuring R&D productivity” nal of Management Studies,
Research Technology Manage- Vol. 43, 47-73.
ment, Vol. 41, No. 6, pp. 30-35. Dory, T. (2005) Review of IPTS´s re-
Carroll, A.B. (1999) “Corporate social search on regional profiles.
responsibility. Evolution of a MLP Regional Profiles and
definitional construct”, Business Growth Poles. Brussels: Work-
and Society, Vol. 38, pp. 268- shop.
295. DTI – Department of Trade and Industry
Castelo, M & Lima, L. (2006): (2001) Business and society:
“Corporate social responsibility developing Corporate Social
and resource-based perspec- Responsibility in the UK
tives”, Journal of Business Eth- (March). London: DTI.
ics, Vol. 69, pp. 111-132. EC – European Commission (2001) Pro-
Cetindamar, D. & Husoy, K. (2007) moting a European framework
“Corporate social responsibility for Corporate Social Responsi-
practices and environmentally bility. Green Paper, Luxem-
responsible behaviour: the case bourg, Office for Official Publi-
of the United Nations Global cations of the European Com-
Compact”, Journal of Business munities, July, [online] Avail-
Ethics, Vol. 76, pp. 163-176. able at: http://
Chryssochoidis, G.M. & Wong, V. www.ec.europa.eu/
(2000) “Customization of prod- employment_social/
uct technology and international publications/2001/


ke3701590_en.pdf Hedstrom, G., Poltorzycki, S. & Strob,
_________________ (2002) European P. (1998) Sustainable develop-
SMEs and Social and Environ- ment: the next generation of
mental Responsibility. Observa- business opportunity, [online]
tory of European SMEs, Report (consulted 20 September 2006).
2002/Nº 4. Luxembourg: Office Available at: http://
for Official Publications of the www.resourcesaver.com/file/
European Communities. toolmanager/O16F4954.pdf.
[online] Available at: http:// Hoopes, D.G., Madsen, T.L. & Walker,
www.ec.europa.eu/enterprise/ G. (2003) “Why is there a re-
enterprise_policy/analysis/doc/ source-based view?. Toward a
smes_observatory_2002_report theory of competitive heteroge-
4_en.pdf neity”, Strategic Management
Freeman, R. E. (1984) Strategic Man- Journal, Vol. 24 (special issue),
agement: a strategic approach. pp. 889-902.
Boston: Pitman. Husted, B.W. & Salazar, J.J. (2006)
Gatignon, H., Tushman, M.L., Smith, “Taking Friedman seriously:
W. & Anderson, P. (2004) maximizing profits and social
“Structural approach to assess- performance”, Journal of Man-
ing innovation: construct devel- agement Studies, Vol. 43, pp.
opment of innovation locus type 75-91.
and characteristics”, Manage- King, A. (2002) “How to get started in
ment Science, Vol. 48, pp. 1103 corporate social responsibility”,
-1123. Financial Management, Octo-
Goh, A. (2005) “Harnessing knowledge ber, pp. 5-10.
for innovation: an integrated Knott, A.M. (2003) “Persistent heteroge-
management framework”, Jour- neity and sustainable innova-
nal of Knowledge Management, tion”, Strategic Management
Vol. 9, pp. 6-18. Journal, Vol. 24, pp. 687-705.
Griffin, J.J. & Mahon, J.F. (1997) “The Lee, M., Son, B. & Lee, H. (1996)
corporate social performance Measuring R&D effectiveness
and corporate financial per- in Korean companies”, Re-
formance debate: twenty-five search Technology Manage-
years of incomparable re- ment, Vol. 39, No. 6, pp. 28-32.
search”, Business and Society, López, M.V., García, A. & Rodríguez,
Vol. 36, pp. 5-31. L. (2007) “Sustainable develop-
Han, J.K., Kim, N. & Srivastava, R.K. ment and corporate perform-
(1998) “Marketing orientation ance: a study based on the Dow
and organizational performance: Jones Sustainability Index”,
is innovation a missing link?”, Journal of Business Ethics,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 62, Vol. 75, pp. 285-300.
pp. 30-45. Matusik, S.F. (2002) “An empirical in-
Hart, S.L. & Milstein, M.B. (2003) vestigation of firm public and
“Creating sustainable value”, private knowledge”, Strategic
Academy of Management Ex- Management Journal, Vol. 23,
ecutive, Vol. 17, pp. 56-69. pp. 457-467.


McWilliams, A. & Siegel, D. (2000) “The link between Corporate
“Corporate social responsibility Social and financial perform-
and financial performance: Cor- ance: evidence from the bank-
relation or misspecification?”, ing industry”, Journal of Busi-
Strategic Management Journal, ness Ethics, 35, 97-109.
Vol. 21, pp. 603-609. Slowinski, G., Chatterji, D., Tshudy,
__________ & ________ (2001) J.A. & Firdley, D.L. (1997)
“Corporate social responsibility: “Are you a leader in environ-
a theory of the firm perspec- mental R&D?”, Research Tech-
tive”, Academy of Management nology Management, Vol. 40,
Review, Vol. 26, pp. 117-127. pp. 47-54.
__________, _________ & Wright, P. Social Investment Forum (2003) Report
(2006) “Corporate social re- on socially responsible invest-
sponsibility: strategic implica- ing trends in the United States.
tions”, Journal of Management [online] (consulted 31 august
Studies, Vol. 43, pp. 1-18. 2006). Available at:
Muñoz, D.R., Medina, R.D. & Nieves, J. www.socialinvest.org/areas/
(2007) “Creando condiciones r e s e a r c h / t r e n d s /
para la innovación”, IX Semina- sri_trends_report_2003.pdf#sea
rio Luso-Español de Economia r c h = % 2 2 s o c i a l %
Empresarial, Covilha, Portugal. 20invest ment%20f or um%
Parker, L. (1986) “Polemical themes in 202003%22.
social accounting: a scenario for Soo, C., Devinney, T., Midgley, D. and
standard setting”, Advances in Deering, A. (2002) “Knowledge
Public Interest Accounting, Vol. management: philosophy, proc-
1, 67-93. esses and pitfalls”, California
Peteraf, M.A. (1993) “The cornerstones Management Review, 44, 129-
of competitive advantage: a re- 150.
source based-view”, Strategic Souitaris, V. (2002) “Firm-specific com-
Management Journal, Vol. 14, petencies determining techno-
pp. 179-191. logical innovation: a survey in
Schumpeter, J.A. (1934) The theory of Greece”, R&D Management,
economic development: An in- Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 61-77.
quiry into profits, credit, inter- Stanwick, P.A. & Stanwick, S.D. (1998)
est and business cycle, Cam- “The relationship between cor-
bridge, MA: Harvard University porate social performance and
Press. organizational size, financial
Sherman, J.D., Souder, W.E. & Jenssen, performance, and environ-
S.A. (2000) “Differential effects mental performance: An empiri-
of the primary forms of cross cal examination”, Journal of
functional integration on prod- Business Ethics, Vol. 17, pp.
uct development cycle time”, 195-204.
The Journal of Product Innova- SustAinability (2004) Values for money:
tion Management, Vol. 17, pp. Reviewing the quality of SRI
257-267. Research. [online] (consulted
Simpson, W.G. & Kohers, T. (2002) 10 September 2006). Available


at: www.sustainability.com/ counting and Finance Research,
downloads_public/ Vol. 7, pp. 48-58.
i n s i g h t _ r e p o r t s / Wernerfelt, B. (1984) “A resource based
values_money.pdf view of the firm”, Strategic
Trillo, M.A. & Pedraza, J.A. (2007) “La Management Journal, Vol. 5,
influencia de la innovación en pp. 171-180.
el capital intelectual de la em- Williamson, D., Lynch-Wood, G. &
presa”, XVII Jornadas Hispano- Ramsay, J. (2006) “Drivers of
Lusas de Gestión Científica, environmental behaviour in
Logroño, Spain, pp. 1419-1431. manufacturing SMEs and the
Tripsas, M. (1997) “Unraveling the implications for CSR”, Journal
process of creative destruction: of Business Ethics, Vol. 67, pp.
complementary assets and in- 317-330.
cumbent survival in the typeset- Wood, D.J. (1991) “Corporate social
ter industry”, Strategic Manage- performance revisited”, Acad-
ment Journal, Vol. 18 (special emy of Management Review,
issue), pp. 119-142. Vol. 16, pp. 691-718.
Tushman, M.L. & Rosenkopf, L. (1992) World Commission on Environment and
“Technological discontinuities Development (1987) Our Com-
and organizational environ- mon Future. Oxford: University
ments”, Administrative Science Press.
Quarterly, Vol. 31, pp. 439-466. Yli-Renko, H., Autio, E. & Sapienza,
Wartick, S.L. & Cochran, P.L. (1985) H.J. (2001) “Social capital,
“The evolution of the corporate knowledge acquisition, and
social performance model”, knowledge exploitation in
Academy of Management Re- young technology-based firms”,
view, Vol. 10, pp. 758-769. Strategic Management Journal,
Weerawardena, J. (2003) “The role of Vol. 22, pp. 587-613.
marketing capability in innova- Zahra, S.A. & Nielsen, A.P. (2002)
tion-based competitive strat- “Sources of capabilities, inte-
egy”, Journal of Strategic Mar- gration and technology com-
keting, Vol. 11, pp. 15-35. mercialization”, Strategic Man-
Wenzel, L. & Thiewes, H. (1999) agement Journal, Vol. 23, pp.
“Corporate social responsibility: 377-398.
Does it pay?”, Journal of Ac-


ANNEXE 1
SURVEY ON CSR AND INNOVATION
With respect to your company, please quantify the strength of support for each statement, by
marking the appropriate column: 5 Strongly support, 4 Support, 3 Neutral, 2 Oppose, 1
Strongly oppose
1 2 3 4 5
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)
1. CSR is a very important concern for your company.
2. In your company, CSR strategy is a key factor in generating competitive advantages.
3. In your company, CSR strategy is aimed at creating future business opportunities, such as opening
up new market sectors.
4. In your company, the importance of CSR has increased in recent years.
5. The company follows a policy of disclosure with respect to its CSR practices.
6. The edition of CSR Guides has helped determine the aspects of CSR that are disclosed by your com-
pany.
7. Adoption of the CSR strategy involves taking environmental aspects into consideration.
8. The disclosure of CSR practices in your company is related to the demands of stakeholders
(investors, institutions, clients, etc.) in this respect.
9. The adoption of CSR practices in your company has a value added effect for stakeholders (profits,
remuneration, working environment, product quality, etc.).
10. The CSR strategy depends on or is supervised or drawn up by the Board of Directors.
11. The CSR practices in your company are audited / certified / confirmed by external agencies.

12. The adoption of CSR practices in your company has a positive effect on the company’s short-term
results (reductions in costs, increases in sales, etc.).
13. The adoption of CSR practices in your company has a positive effect on the company’s long-term
results (new market sectors, change of activity, etc.).

INNOVATION
14. Your company develops its own technology and does not externalize R+D+I activity.
15. Current innovation in your company is grounded upon prior innovation (incremental innovation).

16. The innovation policy in your company is oriented towards inventions (radical innovation).

17. In the innovation carried out in your company, environmental aspects are taken into consideration.

18. In your company’s innovation policy, emphasis is placed on strengthening the capacity to develop
new technological capabilities.
19. Your company’s innovation policies are focused on products.
20. Your company’s innovation policies are focused on processes.

CSR AND INNOVATION
21. Your company’s innovation policies are related to its strategies of sustainability.
22. The adoption of CSR criteria has led to a change in the company’s policies regarding innovation.

23. The adoption of CSR criteria has led to increased expenditure on innovation.
24. The adoption of CSR criteria has led to technological changes in its production processes.

25. The adoption of CSR criteria has led to technological changes that affect the quality of its products
(design, quality, etc.).
26. The adoption of CSR criteria has led to technological changes that affect the range of products that
are marketed.
27. The adoption of CSR criteria has led to technological variations that represent a radical change in
the company’s principal activity.

International Journals Call for Paper
The IISTE, a U.S. publisher, is currently hosting the academic journals listed below. The peer review process of the following journals
usually takes LESS THAN 14 business days and IISTE usually publishes a qualified article within 30 days. Authors should
send their full paper to the following email address. More information can be found in the IISTE website : www.iiste.org

Business, Economics, Finance and Management PAPER SUBMISSION EMAIL
European Journal of Business and Management EJBM@iiste.org
Research Journal of Finance and Accounting RJFA@iiste.org
Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development JESD@iiste.org
Information and Knowledge Management IKM@iiste.org
Developing Country Studies DCS@iiste.org
Industrial Engineering Letters IEL@iiste.org

Physical Sciences, Mathematics and Chemistry PAPER SUBMISSION EMAIL
Journal of Natural Sciences Research JNSR@iiste.org
Chemistry and Materials Research CMR@iiste.org
Mathematical Theory and Modeling MTM@iiste.org
Advances in Physics Theories and Applications APTA@iiste.org
Chemical and Process Engineering Research CPER@iiste.org

Engineering, Technology and Systems PAPER SUBMISSION EMAIL
Computer Engineering and Intelligent Systems CEIS@iiste.org
Innovative Systems Design and Engineering ISDE@iiste.org
Journal of Energy Technologies and Policy JETP@iiste.org
Information and Knowledge Management IKM@iiste.org
Control Theory and Informatics CTI@iiste.org
Journal of Information Engineering and Applications JIEA@iiste.org
Industrial Engineering Letters IEL@iiste.org
Network and Complex Systems NCS@iiste.org

Environment, Civil, Materials Sciences PAPER SUBMISSION EMAIL
Journal of Environment and Earth Science JEES@iiste.org
Civil and Environmental Research CER@iiste.org
Civil and Environmental Research CER@iiste.org

Life Science, Food and Medical Sciences PAPER SUBMISSION EMAIL
Journal of Biology, Agriculture and Healthcare JBAH@iiste.org
Food Science and Quality Management FSQM@iiste.org
Chemistry and Materials Research CMR@iiste.org

Education, and other Social Sciences PAPER SUBMISSION EMAIL
Journal of Education and Practice JEP@iiste.org
Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization JLPG@iiste.org Global knowledge sharing:
New Media and Mass Communication NMMC@iiste.org EBSCO, Index Copernicus, Ulrich's
Journal of Energy Technologies and Policy JETP@iiste.org Periodicals Directory, JournalTOCS, PKP
Historical Research Letter HRL@iiste.org Open Archives Harvester, Bielefeld
Academic Search Engine, Elektronische
Public Policy and Administration Research PPAR@iiste.org Zeitschriftenbibliothek EZB, Open J-Gate,
International Affairs and Global Strategy IAGS@iiste.org OCLC WorldCat, Universe Digtial Library ,
Research on Humanities and Social Sciences RHSS@iiste.org NewJour, Google Scholar.

Developing Country Studies DCS@iiste.org IISTE is member of CrossRef. All journals
Arts and Design Studies ADS@iiste.org have high IC Impact Factor Values (ICV).

11.pp.0276www.iiste.org call for paper-295

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (17)

Destacado

Destacado (20)

Similar a 11.pp.0276www.iiste.org call for paper-295

Similar a 11.pp.0276www.iiste.org call for paper-295 (20)

Más de Alexander Decker

Más de Alexander Decker (20)

Último

Último (20)

11.pp.0276www.iiste.org call for paper-295