IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/buetqu/v21y2011i03p409-444_01.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Institutional Logics in the Study of Organizations: The Social Construction of the Relationship between Corporate Social and Financial Performance

Author

Listed:
  • Orlitzky, Marc

Abstract

This study examines whether the empirical evidence on the relationship between corporate social performance (CSP) and corporate financial performance (CFP) differs depending on the publication outlet in which that evidence appears. This moderator meta-analysis, based on a total sample size of 33,878 observations, suggests that published CSP-CFP findings have been shaped by differences in institutional logics in different subdisciplines of organization studies. In economics, finance, and accounting journals, the average correlations were only about half the magnitude of the findings published in Social Issues in Management, Business Ethics, or Business and Society journals (mean corrected correlation coefficient of .22 vs. .49, respectively). Specifically, economists did not find null or negative CSP-CFP correlations, and average findings published in general management outlets ( = .41) were closer to Social Issues in Management, Business Ethics, and Business and Society results than to findings reported in economics, finance, and accounting journals.

Suggested Citation

  • Orlitzky, Marc, 2011. "Institutional Logics in the Study of Organizations: The Social Construction of the Relationship between Corporate Social and Financial Performance," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(3), pages 409-444, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:21:y:2011:i:03:p:409-444_01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1052150X00010526/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:21:y:2011:i:03:p:409-444_01. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/beq .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.