IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0269400.html

Motivations of potential anchor businesses to support community development and community health

Author

Listed:
  • Catherine C Cohen
  • Nabeel Qureshi
  • Raymond Tsai
  • Harry H Liu

Abstract

Introduction: Some for-profit businesses act like non-profit anchor institutions in contributing to community development, particularly health-related initiatives. Their motives are not well understood. We aimed to 1) identify and describe potential anchor businesses, 2) determine their motivations to contribute to community development, and 3) highlight motivations behind health-related initiatives. Materials and methods: We identified a national sample of potential anchor businesses, grouped by those that contributed to 1) both health-related and non-health initiatives, 2) non-health initiatives only, and 3) those without substantial contributions. We conducted an environmental scan, semi-structured qualitative interviews and directed content analysis through rapid review methodology. Results: We identified 4,512 potential anchor businesses nationally. Among the 108 of these included in the environmental scan, 48% substantially contributed to community development (12% in health). Interviewees’ company philosophies ranged from the idea that economic well-being of the company and community were intertwined, to the idea that commercial success of the company would benefit the community. Motivations for contributions included improving the hiring pool, improved recruitment and retention, and goodwill. Other common sentiments included strategies to focus on core business strengths to address community needs and a desire that companies should not compete in their giving activities. Further, some participants believed health care companies should be investing in health-related initiatives. Conclusions: The generosity of potential anchor businesses’ local contributions may be determined by company philosophy about its relationship with the community. Stakeholders interested in spurring contributions to local communities might consider messaging to leverage businesses’ core strengths and encourage cooperation.

Suggested Citation

  • Catherine C Cohen & Nabeel Qureshi & Raymond Tsai & Harry H Liu, 2022. "Motivations of potential anchor businesses to support community development and community health," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(7), pages 1-18, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0269400
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0269400
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0269400
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0269400&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0269400?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David H. Autor & David Dorn & Gordon H. Hanson, 2013. "The China Syndrome: Local Labor Market Effects of Import Competition in the United States," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(6), pages 2121-2168, October.
    2. Arthur Gautier & Anne-Claire Pache, 2015. "Research on Corporate Philanthropy: A Review and Assessment," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 126(3), pages 343-369, February.
    3. Stephen Brammer & Andrew Millington, 2004. "The Development of Corporate Charitable Contributions in the UK: A Stakeholder Analysis," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(8), pages 1411-1434, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Won-Yong Oh & Young Kyun Chang & Gyeonghwan Lee & Jeongil Seo, 2018. "Intragroup Transactions, Corporate Governance, and Corporate Philanthropy in Korean Business Groups," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 153(4), pages 1031-1049, December.
    2. Frederik Plewnia & Edeltraud Guenther, 2017. "The benefits of doing good: a meta-analysis of corporate philanthropy business outcomes and its implications for management control," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 347-376, October.
    3. Wonsuk Cha & Ujvala Rajadhyaksha, 2021. "What do we know about corporate philanthropy? A review and research directions," Business Ethics, the Environment & Responsibility, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(3), pages 262-286, July.
    4. Blanca de-Miguel-Molina & Vicente Chirivella-González & Beatriz García-Ortega, 2016. "Corporate philanthropy and community involvement. Analysing companies from France, Germany, the Netherlands and Spain," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 50(6), pages 2741-2766, November.
    5. Doyoon Kim & Dongyoub Shin & Jaehong Lee & Grimm Noh, 2024. "Sustainability from institutionalism: determinants of Korean companies’ ESG performances," Asian Business & Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 23(3), pages 393-425, July.
    6. Zhe Ouyang & Peng Cheng & Yang Liu & Ruiju Yang, 2020. "Institutional drivers for corporate philanthropic activities in China: Mediating roles of top management participation," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(1), pages 244-255, January.
    7. Lei Xu & Xiaoning Guo & Yan Liu & Xiaochen Sun & Jie Ji, 2022. "How Does Corporate Charitable Giving Affect Enterprise Innovation? A Literature Review and Research Directions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-21, November.
    8. Kate Hogarth & Marion Hutchinson & Wendy Scaife, 2018. "Corporate Philanthropy, Reputation Risk Management and Shareholder Value: A Study of Australian Corporate giving," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 151(2), pages 375-390, August.
    9. Bose, Sudipta & Podder, Jyotirmoy & Biswas, Kumar, 2017. "Philanthropic giving, market-based performance and institutional ownership: Evidence from an emerging economy," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 429-444.
    10. Dani Rodrik, 2018. "Populism and the economics of globalization," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 1(1), pages 12-33, June.
    11. Yane, Haruka & Yamada, Hiroyuki, 2015. "Import Competition from Neighbors: Impacts on Performances of Enterprises in Vietnam," Conference papers 332621, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    12. Keller, Wolfgang & Utar, Hale, 2023. "International trade and job polarization: Evidence at the worker level," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    13. Mengus, Eric & Davis, Donald R. & Michalski, Tomasz K., 2020. "Labor Market Polarization and The Great Divergence: Theory and Evidence," CEPR Discussion Papers 14623, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    14. Chiquiar, Daniel & Covarrubias, Enrique & Salcedo, Alejandrina, 2016. "Labor market consequences of trade openness and competition in foreign markets," Conference papers 332760, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    15. Bühler, Mathias, 2024. "Who Benefits from Free Trade?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    16. Boddin, Dominik & Henze, Philipp, 2015. "International trade and the occupational mix in manufacturing: Evidence from german micro data," Economics Working Papers 2015-05, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    17. Gordon Hanson & Chen Liu & Craig McIntosh, 2017. "The Rise and Fall of U.S. Low-Skilled Immigration," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 48(1 (Spring), pages 83-168.
    18. Charlotte Senftleben-König, "undated". "Public Sector Employment and Local Multipliers," BDPEMS Working Papers 2014010, Berlin School of Economics.
    19. Franzini, Maurizio & Raitano, Michele, 2019. "Earnings inequality and workers’ skills in Italy," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 215-224.
    20. Picarelli, Nathalie, 2016. "Who really benefits from export processing zones? Evidence from Nicaraguan municipalities," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 318-332.

    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:plo:pone00:0269400. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.