Lois S. Mahoney

Corporate social performance, financial performance and institutional ownership in Canadian firms

Abstract This study examines the relationship of corporate social performance (CSP) to financial performance (FP) and institutional ownership. We perform our empirical analyses on a large-sample of publicly held Canadian firms and use a novel independent measure of CSP. Based on tests utilizing four years of panel data, we found no significant relationship between a composite measure of firms’ CSP and FP. However, we found significant relationships between individual measures of firms’ CSP regarding environmental and international activities and FP. Our findings indicate a significant relationship between firms’ composite CSP measure and the number of institutions investing in firms’ stock. In addition, we found significant relationships between firms’ CSP ratings regarding their international activities and product quality and the number of institutions investing in firms’ stock. These findings, while subject to the limitations inherent in the use of specific CSP measures, provide mixed support for the business case for CSP.

Motivations for issuing standalone CSR reports: a survey of Canadian firms

Purpose - – The purpose of this paper is to provide insight into the companies’ motivations to issue or not issue voluntary standalone corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports in the Canadian context. Design/methodology/approach - – The authors realized a questionnaire survey that asked Canadian companies why they do or do not issue standalone CSR reports, what their motivations and costs are, and the extent to which they comply with GRI guidelines. Findings - – The results show that larger firms issue standalone CSR reports. As larger firms have more political visibility and are subject to greater external scrutiny than smaller firms (Watts and Zimmerman, 1986), the findings indicate that firms primarily issue standalone CSR reports in response to external scrutiny by stakeholders, which is consistent with a stakeholder perspective. The survey also identifies that ancillary motivations for Canadian firms for issuing standalone CSR reports are consistent with legitimacy and signalling perspectives. Research limitations/implications - – The authors acknowledge that the generalizability of the findings is limited due to the sample being situated within a single national context. The inferences drawn from such a sample in Canada may not be applicable to other countries with different national institutional contexts. In addition, the small size of the sample may limit the generalizability of the findings. The authors also did not specifically consider the quality of the CSR reports in the study. Finally, the work may be affected by the inherent weaknesses associated with survey research, including the inherent bias of the individuals responding to the survey. Originality/value - – The research adds to the growing body of research on voluntary CSR disclosures, with particular reference to the Canadian context.

A comparison of the association between corporate social responsibility and executive compensation: United States versus Canada

Prior research shows different associations between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and executive compensation in the United States versus Canada (i.e., McGuire et al., 2003; Mahoney & Thorne, 2006). It follows that these cross-national differences may be attributable to: (1) different compensation strategies; (2) other national differences; or (3) differences in the sampling and measurement techniques used in the respective studies. To gain insight into the factors underlying the cross-national differences, our study uses a single statistical approach on a U.S./Canada database to compare the association between CSR and executive compensation while controlling for size, industry, financial structure, and using common measures of salary, bonus and long-term compensation (LTC). We find that after controlling for size there are no differences in the association between executive compensation and CSR between the United States and Canada, and that LTC is positively associated with CSR in both countries. Thus, our findings suggest that previously reported differences in CSR between the United States and Canada are likely due to differences in the size of the firms used in the samples from the respective countries. Furthermore, our findings show the importance of the association between LTC and CSR for both the U.S. and the Canadian context. Implications of these findings are discussed.

Corporate social responsibility and shareholder support for corporate governance changes

Purpose - This paper examines whether shareholders consider corporate social responsibility (CSR) performance when voting on corporate governance change proposals submitted by dissident shareholders. These proposals recommend changes to the corporate governance status quo and are made by dissident shareholders who are dissatisfied with the company’s existing governance practices. Design/methodology/approach - Using 195 governance change proposals voted on during 2013, the paper examines the relationship between CSR performance (obtained from the MSCI database) and the level of voting support for these proposals. Findings - This study finds that shareholder support for corporate governance change proposals submitted by dissident shareholders is Research limitations/implications - The findings suggest that shareholders may be concerned with the potentially adverse effects of weak CSR performance, especially poor environmental performance, and may support changes to corporate governance structures when a company’s CSR and environmental performance is weaker. Originality/value - As the first research to examine the relationship between CSR and proposed changes to corporate governance, this study provides unique insights into shareholder perceptions of the value of CSR based on shareholders’ support (or lack thereof) for governance changes proposed by dissident shareholders.

The Evolution in CSR Reporting: A Longitudinal Study of Canadian Firms

Abstract Our paper explores the evolution in the reporting of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) for 115 Canadian firms (51 cross-listed on U.S. stock exchanges) throughout the seven year period of 1999–2006, which was the period before and after SOX and Bill 198 were enacted, resulting in a period of increasing pressure for CSR and CSR disclosure (Ballou, Heitger, & Landes, 2006). We examined CSR scores for Canadian firms listed only on Canadian stock exchanges and for Canadian firms cross-listed on U.S. exchanges. During this period, our analysis shows an overall decrease in CSR scores for all Canadian firms in our sample, and for both our subsamples of firms: Canadian firms cross-listed on U.S. stock exchanges and Canadian firms listed only on Canadian exchanges. Our analysis suggests that as a result of increased scrutiny facilitated by the regulatory changes, CSR disclosures become more transparent and comprehensive: CSR Strengths and CSR Weaknesses Scores both declined after 2002 resulting in an overall decline in Total CSR scores. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

An Examination of Alliances and Corporate Social Responsibility

Abstract The rate of alliance formation by firms has greatly increased over the past two decades. Congruently, firm interest in corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives has also increased. Signaling theory suggests that firms may be increasing their CSR strategies in an effort to signal their willingness to operate within social mores. However, firms are faced with the problem of how to communicate their social commitment objectively to stakeholders. We argue that firms are forming CSR alliances in an attempt to signal an objective message to stakeholders concerning their commitment to CSR. To provide insight into these explanations, we compare the Total CSR performance (TCSR) scores of firms that form CSR alliances with those firms that do not. We control for firm size, leverage, profitability, and industry. We find that firms that form CSR alliances generally have higher TCSR scores, which suggests that one of the reasons that firms form these alliances is to publicize their stronger social and environmental records to stakeholders.

Standalone Corporate Social Responsibility Reports and Stock Market Returns

Abstract Increasingly, U.S. firms voluntarily issue standalone corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports to demonstrate to society a commitment to social and environmental activities (Bebbington, Larrinaga, & Moneva, 2008; Erusalimsky, Gray, & Spence, 2006). To ascertain the effect of standalone CSR reports on investors, we compared the association between CSR performance scores and subsequent stock returns for firms that issue standalone CSR reports versus those that do not. Consistent with a signaling perspective (Akerlof, 1970), we found that firms that voluntarily issue standalone CSR reports have a stronger association between total CSR and CSR strengths and subsequent stock returns than firms that do not. Our findings indicated that investors are relying on standalone CSR reports because they reward CSR performance for firms that issue standalone CSR reports CSR performance for those that do not issue standalone CSR reports.