Exploring the relationship between corporate social responsibility and firm competitiveness

Figures & data

Table 1. The main dimensions of corporate social responsibility.

Aspects
Social	Economic	Ecological
Taking care of society’s needs; Taking care of employee wellbeing; Encouragement of cooperation; Assurance of work safety; Possibilities for employee development; Involvement in decision-makin	Profitability assurance; Assurance of competitiveness of goods and services; Risk management; Energy saving; Management efficiency; Productivity assurance.	Knowledge and compliance with environmental legislation; Knowledge of positive and negative impact on the environment; Ecological risk management; Reduction of pollution; Monitoring and compliance of nature-friendly indicators.

Source: created by the authors based on (Castka et al., 2007; Jankalova, 2016, 2017; Pimentel et al., 2016; Lee et al., 2017; Litfin et al., 2017).

Table 2. Comparison of corporate social responsibility dimensions in different studies.

Addressed CSR issues	Studies
	Vilanova (2007); Zait et al. (2015); Snircova et al. (2016)	Castka et al. (2007); Doh et al. (2015); Jankalova (2016, 2017); Pimentel et al. (2016); Joshi et al. (2007)	Dahlsrud (2008)	Nochai and Nochai (2014); Fouad Ibrahim (2017)
Vision of the company	ETHICAL ACTIVITIES	ECONOMIC ASPECT: energy saving	STAKEHOLDER DIMENSION: INTERACTION WITH SOCIETY	ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITY; PHILANTHROPIC RESPONSIBILITY
	Values and reputation, image in the society	ECOLOGICAL ASPECT: knowledge of positive/negative impact on the environment	ENVIRONMENTAL DIMENSION; VOLUNTARINESS DIMENSION
Workplace	Company’s rules of procedures	SOCIAL ASPECT: employee involvement in decision-making	STAKEHOLDER DIMENSION: cooperation with employees	ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITY
	Human rights	SOCIAL ASPECT: assurance of work safety
	Working atmosphere	SOCIAL ASPECT: employee improvement possibilities, taking care of employee welfare
Responsibility	RESPONSIBILITY to society’s interests	ECOLOGICAL ASPECT: ecological risk management, reduction of pollution		LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY: acts following legal system
	Reports related to the company’s activities	ECOLOGICAL ASPECT: monitoring and compliance of nature-friendly indicators
	Transparent activities
Market	Related to the main activities of the company (marketing, pricing, honest competitiveness, innovations)	ECONOMIC ASPET: assurance of profitability, assurance of competitiveness of goods/services, risk management	ECONOMIC DIMENSION: assure profitability, contribution to economic development	ECONOMIC RESPONSIBILITY: reduction of operational costs
Society relations	Philanthropy	SOCIAL ASPECT: taking care of society’s needs, encouraging cooperation	PHILANTHROPIC: activities based on business ethics, voluntariness, activities that are not imposed by the legislative framework	PHILANTHROPIC RESPONSIBILITY
	Partnership with stakeholders		SOCIAL DIMENSION: relation between business and society

Source: created by the authors.

Table 3. Interest groups of corporate social responsibility.

Interest groups	Factors/indicators
Workers	Work safety; working hours; wage; equality of workers; career development
Shareholders	Return on investments; dividends; disclosure of information
Creditors	Solvency; credit status
Consumers	Quality of goods or services; customer satisfaction
Suppliers	Compliance with agreements; fair trade
Society	Enhancing access to employment; responsibility for communities
Government	Paying taxes; social input
Environment	Use of resources; environmental protection

Source: composed by the authors based on Liu et al. (2012).

Table 4. Links between corporate social responsibility and competitiveness.

Authors Influence of social responsibility	Ljubojevic et al., 2012; Maneet, Sudhir, 2011; Minkiewicz et al., 2011	Madueno et al., 2016	Battaglia et al., 2014
Reputation	+	+
Strengthening of the brand	+
Financial capacity	+
Specificity of the product			+
Consumer loyalty	+	+
Highly-competent workers	+	+	+
Market share		+	+
Work efficiency		+	+
Consumer satisfaction		+	+
Cost reduction			+
Risk reduction			+

Source: created by the authors.

Figure 1. Model for relations between corporate social responsibility and competitiveness.

Table 5. The influence of corporate social responsibility dimensions on separate elements of competitiveness (based on the impact coefficients).

	Environmental	Social	Economic	Shareholder	Philanthropic
Financial capacity	0.247	0.140	0.264	0.253	0.123
Quality of production	0.173	0.153	0.183	0.263	0.110
Satisfied needs of consumers	0.267	0.267	0.223	0.320	0.160
Productivity, work efficiency	0.220	0.203	0.220	0.317	0.127
Possibilities for introduction of innovations	0.253	0.180	0.197	0.273	0.120
Image, reputation	0.353	0.350	0.313	0.340	0.340

Source: created by the authors.

Table 6. Comparison of studies on the relationship between corporate social responsibility and competitiveness.

Outcomes of the current study
	Environmental dimension	Social dimension	Economic dimension	Shareholder dimension	Philanthropic dimension
Financial capacity	+		+
Quality of production
Satisfied needs of consumers	+	+	+	+	+
Productivity, work efficiency		+		+	+
Possibilities for introduction of innovations
Image, reputation	+	+	+	+	+
Outcomes of studies (Battaglia et al., 2014; Snircova et al., 2016; Zait et al., 2015)
Financial capacity	+		–
Quality of production			–
Satisfied needs of consumers			–
Productivity, work efficiency			–	+
Possibilities for introduction of innovations			–
Image, reputation	+	+	–	+	+
Outcomes of studies (Tantalo et al., 2014)
Competitiveness (this study analyses competitiveness as a unit, without dividing it into separate elements of competitiveness)	High involvement (related to sustainable innovation) Medium involvement (related to ecological raw materials)	Low involvement	–	Low involvement (related to value creation for suppliers and society) Medium involvement (related to value creation for employees) High involvement (related to value creation for stakeholders)	Low involvement

Source: created by the authors.

Appendix 1. The coefficients of impact of CSR dimensions on the elements of firm competitiveness.

Environmental dimension
Score Competitiveness	1	2	3	4	Sum
Financial capacity	0.010	0.100	0.070	0.067	0.247
Quality of production	0.053	0.040	0.080	0	0.173
Satisfied needs of consumers	0.007	0.053	0.180	0.027	0.267
Productivity, work efficiency	0.020	0.087	0.100	0.013	0.220
Possibilities for introduction of innovations	0.013	0.053	0.160	0.027	0.253
Image, reputation	0	0.013	0.100	0.240	0.353
Social dimension
	1	2	3	4	Sum
Financial capacity	0.060	0.080	0	0	0.140
Quality of production	0.053	0.080	0.020	0	0.153
Satisfied needs of consumers	0.010	0.047	0.170	0.04	0.267
Productivity, work efficiency	0.030	0.073	0.100	0	0.203
Possibilities for introduction of innovations	0.040	0.080	0.060	0	0.180
Image, reputation	0	0.007	0.130	0.213	0.350
Economic dimension
	1	2	3	4	Sum
Financial capacity	0.007	0.080	0.110	0.067	0.264
Quality of production	0.033	0.100	0.050	0	0.183
Satisfied needs of consumers	0.010	0.120	0.080	0.013	0.223
Productivity, work efficiency	0.020	0.107	0.040	0.053	0.220
Possibilities for introduction of innovations	0.030	0.100	0.040	0.027	0.197
Image, reputation	0	0.027	0.180	0.106	0.313
Shareholder dimension
	1	2	3	4	Sum
Financial capacity	0.013	0.067	0.120	0.053	0.253
Quality of production	0.003	0.093	0.100	0.067	0.263
Satisfied needs of consumers	0	0.02	0.180	0.120	0.320
Productivity, work efficiency	0	0.027	0.170	0.120	0.317
Possibilities for introduction of innovations	0.007	0.073	0.100	0.093	0.273
Image, reputation	0	0.013	0.140	0.187	0.340
Philanthropic dimension
	1	2	3	4	Sum
Financial capacity	0.080	0.033	0.010	0	0.123
Quality of production	0.093	0.007	0.010	0	0.110
Satisfied needs of consumers	0.057	0.060	0.030	0.013	0.160
Productivity, work efficiency	0.087	0.020	0.020	0	0.127
Possibilities for introduction of innovations	0.083	0.027	0.010	0	0.120
Image, reputation	0	0.007	0.160	0.173	0.340

Litfin, T., Meeh-Bunse, G., Luer, K., & Teckert, Ö. (2017). Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting - a Stakeholder’s Perspective Approach. Business Systems Research Journal, 8(1), 30–42. https://doi.org/10.1515/bsrj-2017-0003

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Zait, D., Onea, A., Tatarusanu, M., & Ciulu, R. (2015). The Social Responsibility and Competitiveness of the Romanian Firm. Procedia Economics and Finance, 20, 687–694. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00124-0

 Google Scholar

Doh, J. P., Littell, B., & Quigley, N. (2015). CSR and sustainability in emerging markets: Societal, institutional, and organizational influences. Organizational Dynamics, 44(2), 112–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2015.02.005

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Joshi, M., Tiwari, P. S., Joshi, V. (2007). Corporate Social Responsibility: Global Perspective, Competitiveness, Social Entrepreneurship & Innovation. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=999348

 Google Scholar

Dahlsrud, A. (2008). How Corporate Social Responsibility is Defined: an Analysis of 37 Definitions. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 15(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.132

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Nochai, R., & Nochai, T. (2014, May). The Effect of Dimensions of Corporate Social Responsibility on Consumers’ Buying Behavior in Thailand: A Case Study in Bangkok. International Conference on Economics, Social Sciences and Languages.

 Google Scholar

Ibrahim, N. A. F. (2017). The relationship between corporate social responsibility and employer attractiveness in Egypt: The moderating effect of the individual’s income. Contemporary Management Research, 13(2), 81–106. https://doi.org/10.7903/cmr.17430

 Google Scholar

Liu, S., Cai, L., & Li, Z. (2012). Social Responsibilities and Evaluation Indicators of Listed Companies in the Perspective of Interest Groups. American Journal of Industrial and Business Management, 02(03), 102–107. https://doi.org/10.4236/ajibm.2012.23014

 Google Scholar

Ljubojevic, Č., Ljubojevic, G., Maksimovic, N. (2012). Social Responsibility and Competitive Advantage of the Companies in Serbia. Proceedings of the 13th Management International Conference,.

 Google Scholar

Minkiewicz, J., Evans, J., Bridson, K., & Mavondo, F. (2011). Corporate image in the leisure services sector. Journal of Services Marketing, 25(3), 190–201. https://doi.org/10.1108/08876041111129173

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Madueno, J. H., Jorge, M. L., Conesa, I. M., & Martinez, D. (2016). Relationship between corporate social responsibility and competitive performance in Spanish SMEs: Empirical evidence from a stakeholders’ perspective. Business Research Quarterly, 19(1), 55–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brq.2015.06.002

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Battaglia, M., Testa, F., Bianchi, L., Iraldo, F., & Frey, M. (2014). Corporate Social Responsibility and Competitiveness within SMEs of the Fashion Industry: Evidence from Italy and France. Sustainability, 6(2), 872–893. https://doi.org/10.3390/su6020872

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar