THE EFFECT OF EMPLOYEE FINANCING DIVERSITY AND CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ON SUSTAINABLE FIRM PERFORMANCE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61506/01.00010Keywords:
Employee Financing Diversity,, orporate Social Responsibility,, Sustainable Firm PerformanceAbstract
This study delves into the intricate dynamics between Employee Financing Diversity (EFD), Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), and Sustainable Firm Performance (SFR) within the contemporary corporate landscape. Employing a quantitative methodology involving a sample of 200 participants, this research uncovers pivotal insights into the reciprocal influence of these variables and their profound impact on organizational trajectories. The findings illuminate robust, positive associations between EFD and both CSR and SFR. EFD emerges as a driving force behind the augmentation of Corporate Social Responsibility initiatives, which, in turn, exert a potent influence on Sustainable Firm Performance. These outcomes underscore the imperative for organizations to not only concentrate on conventional diversity benchmarks but also to consider financial diversity when designing their workforce structures. Furthermore, the study underscores the paramount role of Corporate Social Responsibility in catalyzing advancements in Sustainable Firm Performance. It accentuates the significance of ethical business conduct, environmental stewardship, community engagement, and stakeholder accountability. Businesses that prioritize the synergistic cultivation of Employee Financing Diversity and CSR are strategically positioned to secure a competitive edge, attracting a diverse customer base, socially conscious investors, and a highly skilled workforce. The implications of this research extend to policymakers, highlighting the necessity of fostering responsible corporate behaviors and financial inclusivity. The study also beckons further investigation into the underlying mechanisms governing these intricate relationships. Acknowledging its limitations, this study encourages subsequent research endeavors to explore causal pathways and mediating factors. In conclusion, this study fortifies the proposition that socially responsible and diversified corporate practices are pivotal in shaping a more sustainable and equitable future for both businesses and society.
References
Abpperle, K. E., Carroll, A. B., & Hatfield, J. D. (1985). An empirical examination of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 28(2), 446-463.
Ali, A., Alim, W., Ahmed, J., & Nisar, S. (2022). Yoke of Corporate Governance and Firm Performance: A Study of Listed Firms in Pakistan. Indian Journal of Commerce and Management Studies, 13(1), 8-17.
Bansal, P., & Roth, K. (2000). Why companies go green: A model of ecological responsiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 717-736.
Bertrand, M., & Schoar, A. (2003). Managing with style: The effect of managers on firm policies. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(4), 1169-1208.
Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business & Society, 38(3), 268-295.
Cox, T., & Blake, S. (1991). Managing cultural diversity: Implications for organizational competitiveness. Academy of Management Executive, 5(3), 45-56.
Dass, P., & Parker, B. (1999). Strategies for managing human resources and diversity. International Journal of Manpower, 20(5/6), 235-249.
Ferrell, O. C., & Ferrell, L. (2011). The quest for global corporate social responsibility: The mad dash for competitive advantage. Business Horizons, 54(3), 237-249.
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman.
Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Times Magazine, 13.
Irala, M., Arana, G., Mendoza, X., Martínez, M. A., & Martínez, J. M. (2018). Corporate social responsibility in family firms: The moderating role of the socioemotional wealth. Journal of Business Ethics, 152(3), 701-717.
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360.
Kacmar, K. M., Andrews, M. C., Harris, K. J., & Tepper, B. J. (2013). Ethical leadership and subordinate outcomes: The mediating role of organizational politics and the moderating role of political skill. Journal of Business Ethics, 115(1), 33-44.
Kim, Y., Hwang, J., & Burgers, W. P. (1993). An exploration of the relationship between environmental performance and environmental disclosure. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 12(1), 35-51.
Kochan, T. A., Bezrukova, K., Ely, R., Jackson, S. E., Joshi, A., Jehn, K. A., ... & Thomas, D. A. (2003). The effects of diversity on business performance: Report of the diversity research network. Human Resource Management, 42(1), 3-21.
Krueger, A. B. (2003). Economic considerations and class size. Economic Journal, 113(485), F34-F63.
Margolis, J. D., Elfenbein, H. A., & Walsh, J. P. (2009). Does it pay to be good... and does it matter? A meta-analysis of the relationship between corporate social and financial performance. Harvard Business School NOM Unit Working Paper, (11-025).
McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 117-127.
Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853-886.
Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24(3), 403-441.
Peloza, J., & Shang, J. (2011). How can corporate social responsibility activities create value for stakeholders? A systematic review. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(1), 117-135.
Peloza, J., & Shang, J. (2011). How can corporate social responsibility activities create value for stakeholders? A systematic review. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(1), 117-135.
Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78-92.
Rynes, S. L., Colbert, A. E., & Brown, K. G. (2002). HR professionals' beliefs about effective human resource practices: Correspondence between research and practice. Human Resource Management, 41(2), 149-174.
Sachs, J. D. (2015). The age of sustainable development. Columbia University Press.
Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 225-243.
Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 225-243.
Sharma, S., & Henriques, I. (2005). Stakeholder influences on sustainability practices in the Canadian forest products industry. Strategic Management Journal, 26(2), 159-180.
Sulehri, F. A., Ahmed, M., & Ali, A. (2022). Proprietorship Structure and Firm Performance in the Context of Tunneling: An Empirical Analysis of Non-Financial Firms in Pakistan. Journal of Policy Research (JPR), 8(4), 115-124.
Treviño, L. J., & Mixon, F. G. Jr. (2004). A time-based model of the influence of a firm’s strategic orientation on the development of dynamic capabilities. Managerial and Decision Economics, 25(6-7), 321-337.
Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance–financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18(4), 303-319.
Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (2003). The corporate social performance–financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 24(8), 745-766.
Windsor, D. (2001). The future of corporate social responsibility. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 9(3), 225-256.
Wood, D. J. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16(4), 691-718.
Zhu, Y., Sun, L., & Leung, T. K. (2009). Corporate social responsibility, firm reputation, and firm performance: The role of ethical leadership. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 26(3), 617-636.
