2. Business for Social Responsibility: 2001 defines
CSR as „„operating in a manner that meets and
even exceeds the legal, ethical, commercial and
public expectations that society has of business‟‟
It is proposed that the Indian firms, knowingly
or unknowingly, conduct their CSR
practices, oriented towards their stakeholder
These CSR practices are aligned with their
stakeholders‟ needs and expectations,
3. Indian government has proposed to implement
a bill which will make it mandatory for Indian
corporations either with a turn over of INR 10
Billion or net profit of INR 50 million to spend
2% of the preceding three years profit on CSR
CSR has a special relevance for India as India
has a rich and living spiritual heritage to
complement the “analytical ethics” from the
West with her “intuitive” or “being” or
“consciousness” ethics (Enderle, 1997)
4.
5. One of the oldest questions in moral philosophy
is whether it pays to be a morally good person
Many scholars, in the past, have tried to find
the relation of CSR spending with the bottom
line of the company and majority of them have
found positive relationship between them
The literature shows link between CSR and
financial performances of the companies.
6. We are interested to investigate the difference
in CSR orientation of the companies on the
basis of the difference in their profits
Hypothesis 1: The CSR orientation of the firms differs
on the basis of the Profits (PAT) they make
7.
8. Widely discussed in the literature about the
difference in need, behavior and expectations of
business customers, with the non business
customer to a large extent ( kreindler and
rajguru, 2006)
industrial marketing situations show unique
characteristics that must be distinguished from
consumer marketing: a small number of
customers for any given supplier, buyer-seller
interdependence and the existence of the durable
customer supplier relationship (Bonoma and
Johnston, 1978; Corey, 1976; Webster, 1979)
9. According to “Consumer culture theory” (CCT)
proposed by Arnould and Thompson
(2005), there exists the dynamic relationships
between consumer actions, the
marketplace, and cultural meanings
Hypothesis 2 :The CSR orientation of the firm depends
on the nature of its costumer i.e. B to B
firms has distinct CSR behavior to that of B to C firms
10.
11. Environmental protection is generally paid lot
of attention in the area of CSR, (Reinhardt
and. Stavins, 2010), probably because of the
direct and indirect impact, the companies‟
activities can have on its stakeholders
Bhopal gas Tragedy resulted in a loss of 10,000
lives and permanently disabled nearly 50,000
people and continued life-long misery for over
300,000 with certain genetic defects passed on
to the next generation
12. Different industrial sectors are expected to
have varied impact on society and environment
for e.g Tobacco companies , Auto and oil
companies
Deegan and Gordon (1996) noted that an
industry whose activities modify or affect the
environment might disclose more detailed
social responsibility information than the
companies in other industries
13. Hypothesis 3: The CSR orientation of the firms
depends on the nature of their impact on
environment i.e. manufacturing industries
practice CSR distinctly when compared to non
manufacturing or service industries
14.
15. Graves and Waddock (1994) and Johnson and
Greening (1999) document a relationship
between firm ownership structure and CSR
Keim (1978), Ullmann (1985), and Roberts (1992)
all document a positive relationship between
dispersed corporate ownership and CSR
disclosure in the context of developed countries.
A recent study by Li and Zang, (2010), in
China, found difference in behavior of the firms
controlled by state towards CSR when compared
with the non state firms
16. Hypothesis 4: The CSR orientation of public
sector firms is different from the CSR
orientation of private sector firms in India
17. We collected data regarding the CSR policies and
practices of top 200 public listed companies in India
Content analysis was used to generate the
underlying data for our research.
It is a „„technique for making inferences by
objectively and systematically identifying specified
characteristics of messages”
We analyzed the websites, annual reports and
sustainability reports of the companies in our
sample
18. We found that these companies worked on one
or more of the 100 areas and deployed any or a
combination of 38 methodologies
We categorized those 100 areas into 8 broad
areas those are
„Education‟, „Health‟, „Community
Welfare‟, „Entrepreneurship
Development‟, „Environment‟, „Work
Place‟, „Market Place‟, „Rural Development‟
Z test of proportions was used to test our
hypothesis
19. Activities Explanation
The companies working in the area of promoting education for e.g. Child
Education
education, girl education, providing scholarships , etc.
The companies working in the area of health care for the needful for e.g.
Health
Rural health, preventing HIV/AIDS etc.
The companies working for welfare of various sections of society for e.g.
Community Welfare
Philanthropic donations, promoting inclusive growth
The companies working towards promotion of entrepreneurial activities or
Entrepreneurship
helping people to set up their own enterprises to earn their livelihood for
Development
e.g. Imparting technical know how, provision of start up capital, etc.
20. The company states a policy of minimizing negative environmental
impact or positively benefiting the natural environment as a part of
Environment
their business practices. For e.g. Not lending to industries depleting Ozone
layer
The companies working in issues related to its market having impact on its
Market Place
business. For e.g. Provisions of micro finance in villages etc.
The companies working in issues related to its workplace development,
Work Place primarily aimed for the welfare of internal customers i.e. employees. For
example education of employees’ children etc.
The companies carrying out activities for the development of rural areas. For
Rural Development e.g. Carrying out agriculture development activities, provisioning of street
lights in rural areas etc.
21. Hypothesis Description Supported at p<0.05 in areas
Education,
H1 Profits (PAT)
Health and Community welfare
H2 B to B Vs B to C Community Welfare
H3 Manf. Vs Non Manf. Health
H4 Public Vs Private ‘None'
22. Greater proportions of companies with higher
Profits (PAT> 10 Billion) works in areas of
Education, Health and Community Welfare
Larger proportions of B to B companies works
for the cause of community welfare
Greater proportions of Manufacturing
industries work for the cause of Health, they
should also focus on environment
23. Agle, B., Mitchell, R. and Wood, D. (1999), “Who matters to CEOs? An investigation of
stakeholder attributes and salience, corporate performance, and CEO values”, Academy of
Management Journal, Vol. 42 No. 5, pp. 507-25.
Brian Murphy, Paul Maguiness, Chris Pescott, Soren Wislang, Jingwu Ma, Rongmei
Wang, (2005) "Stakeholder perceptions presage holistic stakeholder relationship marketing
performance", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 39 Iss: 9/10, pp.1049 – 1059
Fitchett, J. (2004), Buyers Be Wary: Marketing Stakeholder Values and the
Consumer, Research Paper Series No. 19-2004, ICCSR, Nottingham University Business
School, Nottingham.
Galbreath, J. (2006), “Does primary stakeholder management positively affect the bottom
line? Some evidence from Australia”, Management Decision, Vol. 44 No. 8, pp. 1106-21.
Greenley, G. and Foxall, G. (1996), “Consumer and non-consumer stakeholder orientations
in UK companies”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 35, pp. 105-16.
Polonsky, M. (1995), “A stakeholder theory approach to designing environmental
marketing strategy”, Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 29-
46.
Polonsky, M., Carlson, L. and Fry, M. (2003), “The harm chain: a public policy development
and stakeholder perspective”, Marketing Theory, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 345-64.
