IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i3p1034-d483604.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Priority Stakeholders’ Perception: Social Responsibility Indicators

Author

Listed:
  • Rosane Maria Seibert

    (Applied Social Sciences Department, Campus of Santo Ângelo, University Regional Integrada do Alto Uruguai e das Missões (URI), Santo Ângelo RS 98.802-470, Brazil)

  • Clea Beatriz Macagnan

    (Business School Department, Campus of Porto Alegre/RS, University of Vale do Rio dos Sinos (UNISINOS), Porto Alegre RS 91.330-002, Brazil)

  • Robert Dixon

    (Business School, Campus of Durham, Durham University (DUBS), Durham DH1 3LB, UK)

Abstract

This study aims to build a list of composite indicators by information that enable the assessment of philanthropic higher education organizations’ (PHEOs) social responsibility based on the interests of their stakeholders. A list of 88 social responsibility indicators was built based on a literature review and stakeholder interest to serve as a basis for the composite indicators. In order to identify and validate the indicators, field research was carried out. Stakeholders from Brazil and the United Kingdom scored them from one (not important) to five (very important) for each indicator identified in the literature review. With 540 valid answers, they suggested inclusions and exclusions according to their interests. Next, a correlation analysis was performed to identify and eliminate redundant indicators. The principal component analysis extracted the composite indicators. The results point to 11 principal components that are configured as composite indicators to evaluate the performance of PHEOs social responsibility considering the stakeholder’s interests, a factor that differentiates this research from the literature revision done. Some of the composite indicators are close to the social responsibility categories reviewed in the literature. However, others show more specific and in-depth interests, especially regarding the stakeholders themselves. These composite indicators help managers establish disclosure policies whenever they are focused on seeking legitimacy in the social context of PHEOs. It also contributes to the advancement of theoretical knowledge, presenting composite indicators, from the stakeholder’s perspective, for the disclosure of social responsibility of PHEOs.

Suggested Citation

  • Rosane Maria Seibert & Clea Beatriz Macagnan & Robert Dixon, 2021. "Priority Stakeholders’ Perception: Social Responsibility Indicators," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-22, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:3:p:1034-:d:483604
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/3/1034/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/3/1034/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Haniffa, R.M. & Cooke, T.E., 2005. "The impact of culture and governance on corporate social reporting," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 391-430.
    2. Carroll, Archie B., 2000. "Ethical Challenges for Business in the New Millennium: Corporate Social Responsibility and Models of Management Morality," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(1), pages 33-42, January.
    3. Dierkes, Meinolf & Preston, Lee E., 1977. "Corporate social accounting reporting for the physical environment: A critical review and implementation proposal," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 3-22, January.
    4. Aerts, Walter & Cormier, Denis, 2009. "Media legitimacy and corporate environmental communication," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 1-27, January.
    5. Carroll, Archie B., 1991. "The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 39-48.
    6. Kansal, Monika & Joshi, Mahesh & Batra, Gurdip Singh, 2014. "Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosures: Evidence from India," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 217-229.
    7. Riham Rizk & Robert Dixon & Anne Woodhead, 2008. "Corporate social and environmental reporting: a survey of disclosure practices in Egypt," Social Responsibility Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 4(3), pages 306-323, August.
    8. Nada K. Kakabadse & Cecile Rozuel & Linda Lee-Davies, 2005. "Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder approach: a conceptual review," International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(4), pages 277-302.
    9. Rosane Maria Seibert & Clea Beatriz Macagnan & Robert Dixon & Davi Souza Simon, 2019. "Social responsibility indicators: perspective of stakeholders in Brazil and in the UK," International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 16(2), pages 128-144, July.
    10. Khawaja Fawad Latif, 2018. "The Development and Validation of Stakeholder-Based Scale for Measuring University Social Responsibility (USR)," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 140(2), pages 511-547, November.
    11. Marie Pavláková Dočekalová & Alena Kocmanová & Iveta Šimberová & Jiří Koleňák, 2018. "Modelling of Social Key Performance Indicators of Corporate Sustainability Performance," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 66(1), pages 303-312.
    12. MUNTHER Al-Nimer, 2019. "Effect Of Corporate Governance Rules On Voluntary Disclosure In Jordanian Corporations Listed With The Amman Stock Exchange (Ase): (An Empirical Study)," Studies in Business and Economics, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Faculty of Economic Sciences, vol. 14(1), pages 154-168, April.
    13. Andrea Liesen & Andreas G. Hoepner & Dennis M. Patten & Frank Figge, 2015. "Does stakeholder pressure influence corporate GHG emissions reporting? Empirical evidence from Europe," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 28(7), pages 1047-1074, September.
    14. Barry Ackers & Neil Stuart Eccles, 2015. "Mandatory corporate social responsibility assurance practices," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 28(4), pages 515-550, May.
    15. Core, John E., 2001. "A review of the empirical disclosure literature: discussion," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1-3), pages 441-456, September.
    16. Benedetta Siboni & Carlotta del Sordo & Silvia Pazzi, 2013. "Sustainability Reporting in State Universities: An Investigation of Italian Pioneering Practices," International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development (IJSESD), IGI Global Scientific Publishing, vol. 4(2), pages 1-15, April.
    17. Healy, Paul M. & Palepu, Krishna G., 2001. "Information asymmetry, corporate disclosure, and the capital markets: A review of the empirical disclosure literature," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1-3), pages 405-440, September.
    18. Stuart Cooper & Richard Slack, 2015. "Reporting practice, impression management and company performance: a longitudinal and comparative analysis of water leakage disclosure," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(6-7), pages 801-840, December.
    19. Hansmann, Henry, 1990. "Why Do Universities Have Endowments?," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 19(1), pages 3-42, January.
    20. Lee Cronbach, 1951. "Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 16(3), pages 297-334, September.
    21. Alexander Dahlsrud, 2008. "How corporate social responsibility is defined: an analysis of 37 definitions," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, January.
    22. Samuel O. Idowu & Maria Aluchna, 2017. "Dynamics of Corporate Social Responsibility: A Critical Approach to Theory and Practice: An Introduction," CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance, in: Maria Aluchna & Samuel O. Idowu (ed.), The Dynamics of Corporate Social Responsibility, chapter 0, pages 1-6, Springer.
    23. Susan Lee Conway & Patricia Ann O'Keefe & Sue Louise Hrasky, 2015. "Legitimacy, accountability and impression management in NGOs: the Indian Ocean tsunami," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 28(7), pages 1075-1098, September.
    24. K.A.K. Gnanaweera & N. Kunori, 2018. "Corporate sustainability reporting: Linkage of corporate disclosure information and performance indicators," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 1423872-142, January.
    25. Caterina Pesci & Ericka Costa & Teerooven Soobaroyen, 2015. "The forms of repetition in social and environmental reports: insights from Hume's notion of 'impressions'," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(6-7), pages 738-764, December.
    26. Maria Baldini & Lorenzo Dal Maso & Giovanni Liberatore & Francesco Mazzi & Simone Terzani, 2018. "Role of Country- and Firm-Level Determinants in Environmental, Social, and Governance Disclosure," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(1), pages 79-98, June.
    27. Sahar Sepasi & Udo Braendle & Amir Hossein Rahdari, 2018. "Comprehensive sustainability reporting in higher education institutions," Social Responsibility Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 15(2), pages 155-170, October.
    28. Bowman, Edward H. & Haire, Mason, 1976. "Social impact disclosure and corporate annual reports," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 11-21, January.
    29. Clement, Ronald W., 2005. "The lessons from stakeholder theory for U.S. business leaders," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 255-264.
    30. Mohammad Jizi & Aly Salama & Robert Dixon & Rebecca Stratling, 2014. "Corporate Governance and Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure: Evidence from the US Banking Sector," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 125(4), pages 601-615, December.
    31. Mohammad I. Jizi & Robert Dixon, 2017. "Are Risk Management Disclosures Informative or Tautological? Evidence from the U.S. Banking Sector," Accounting Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 7-30, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Guoxian Cao & Chaoyang Guo & Hezhong Li, 2022. "Risk Analysis of Public–Private Partnership Waste-to-Energy Incineration Projects from the Perspective of Rural Revitalization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-19, July.
    2. Camilla Salvatore & Silvia Biffignandi & Annamaria Bianchi, 2022. "Corporate Social Responsibility Activities Through Twitter: From Topic Model Analysis to Indexes Measuring Communication Characteristics," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 164(3), pages 1217-1248, December.
    3. Thyago C. C. Nepomuceno & Cinzia Daraio & Ana Paula C. S. Costa, 2021. "Multicriteria Ranking for the Efficient and Effective Assessment of Police Departments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-15, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rosane Maria Seibert & Clea Beatriz Macagnan & Robert Dixon & Davi Souza Simon, 2019. "Social responsibility indicators: perspective of stakeholders in Brazil and in the UK," International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 16(2), pages 128-144, July.
    2. Clea Beatriz Macagnan & Rosane Maria Seibert, 2021. "Sustainability Indicators: Information Asymmetry Mitigators between Cooperative Organizations and Their Primary Stakeholders," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-16, July.
    3. Eduardo Ortas & Igor Álvarez & Eugenio Zubeltzu, 2017. "Firms’ Board Independence and Corporate Social Performance: A Meta-Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-26, June.
    4. Hans B. Christensen & Luzi Hail & Christian Leuz, 2021. "Mandatory CSR and sustainability reporting: economic analysis and literature review," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 1176-1248, September.
    5. Víctor Meseguer-Sánchez & Emilio Abad-Segura & Luis Jesús Belmonte-Ureña & Valentín Molina-Moreno, 2020. "Examining the Research Evolution on the Socio-Economic and Environmental Dimensions on University Social Responsibility," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(13), pages 1-30, July.
    6. María del Mar Miras-Rodríguez & Domingo Martínez-Martínez & Bernabé Escobar-Pérez, 2018. "Which Corporate Governance Mechanisms Drive CSR Disclosure Practices in Emerging Countries?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-20, December.
    7. Kansal, Monika & Joshi, Mahesh & Batra, Gurdip Singh, 2014. "Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosures: Evidence from India," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 217-229.
    8. Matthias S. Fifka, 2013. "Corporate Responsibility Reporting and its Determinants in Comparative Perspective – a Review of the Empirical Literature and a Meta‐analysis," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(1), pages 1-35, January.
    9. Nazim Hussain, 2015. "Impact of Sustainability Performance on Financial Performance: An Empirical Study of Global Fortune (N100) Firms," Working Papers 1, Venice School of Management - Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    10. Muhammad Akram Naseem & Jun Lin & Ramiz ur Rehman & Muhammad Ishfaq Ahmad & Rizwan Ali, 2019. "Moderating role of financial ratios in corporate social responsibility disclosure and firm value," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-19, April.
    11. Akrum Helfaya & Tantawy Moussa, 2017. "Do Board's Corporate Social Responsibility Strategy and Orientation Influence Environmental Sustainability Disclosure? UK Evidence," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(8), pages 1061-1077, December.
    12. Iatridis, George Emmanuel, 2015. "Corporate philanthropy in the US stock market: Evidence on corporate governance, value relevance and earnings manipulation," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 113-126.
    13. Bongani Munkuli & Renee Horne, 2018. "Financial Markets Value Reputation for Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) – A Study of the South African Mining Sector," Africagrowth Agenda, Africagrowth Institute, vol. 15(2), pages 17-22.
    14. Carmelo Reverte, 2012. "The Impact of Better Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure on the Cost of Equity Capital," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(5), pages 253-272, September.
    15. Huang, Xiaobei “Beryl†& Watson, Luke, 2015. "Corporate social responsibility research in accounting," Journal of Accounting Literature, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 1-16.
    16. Amin Jan & Maran Marimuthu & Muhammad Pisol bin @Mat Isa & Pia A. Albinsson, 2021. "Sustainability Practices and Banks Financial Performance: A Conceptual Review from the Islamic Banking Industry in Malaysia," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 13(11), pages 1-61, July.
    17. Mohammadsadegh Omidvar & Maria Palazzo, 2023. "The Influence of Corporate Social Responsibility Aspects on Business Model Innovation, Competitive Advantage, and Company Performance: A Study on Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises in Iran," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-19, November.
    18. Rami Salem & Ernest Ezeani & Xi Song, 2023. "The relationship between religiosity and voluntary disclosure quality: a cross-country evidence from the banking sector," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 60(3), pages 983-1023, April.
    19. DeBoskey, D.G. & Luo, Yan & Wang, Jeff J., 2018. "Do specialized board committees impact the transparency of corporate political disclosure? Evidence from S&P 500 companies," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 8-19.
    20. Sergiy D. Dmytriyev & R. Edward Freeman & Jacob Hörisch, 2021. "The Relationship between Stakeholder Theory and Corporate Social Responsibility: Differences, Similarities, and Implications for Social Issues in Management," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(6), pages 1441-1470, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:3:p:1034-:d:483604. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.