Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Effect of R&D Intensity on Corporate Social Responsibility

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study examines the impact that research and development (R&D) intensity has on corporate social responsibility (CSR). We base our research on the resource-based view (RBV) theory, which contributes to our analysis of R&D intensity and CSR because this perspective explicitly recognizes the importance of intangible resources. Both R&D and CSR activities can create assets that provide firms with competitive advantage. Furthermore, the employment of such activities can improve the welfare of the community and satisfy stakeholder expectations, which might vary according to their prevailing environment. As expressions of CSR and R&D vary throughout industries, we extend our research by analysing the impact that R&D intensity has on CSR across both manufacturing and non-manufacturing industries. Our results show that R&D intensity positively affects CSR and that this relationship is significant in manufacturing industries, while a non-significant result was obtained in non-manufacturing industries.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ahmed, N.U., R.V. Montagno and R.J. Flenze: 1998, ‘Organizational Performance and Environmental Consciousness: An Empirical Study’, Management Decision 36, 57 – 62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bain, J.S.: 1959, Industrial Organization. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney J.: 1986, ‘Organizational culture: can it be a source of sustained competitive advantage?’, Academy of Management Review, 11, 656–665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J.: 1991, ‘Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage’, Journal of Management, 17, 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Zion, U.: 1984, ‘The R&D and investment decision and its relationship to the firm’s market value: Some preliminary results’, in Z. Griliches (ed.), R&D, Patents, and Productivity. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, 134–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman, S. L., Wicks, A. C, Kotha, S and Jones, M. T.: 1999, ‘Does stakeholder orientation matter? The relationship between stakeholder management models and firm financial performance’, Academy of Management Journal, 42(5), 488-506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berrone, P., Surroca, J. and Tribó, J.A.: 2007, ‘Corporate ethical identity as a determinant of firm performance: a test of the mediating role of stakeholder satisfaction’, Journal of Business Ethics, 76, 35-53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouquet, C. and Deutsche, Y.: 2008, ‘The impact of Corporate Social Performance on a Firm’s Multinationality’, Journal of Business Ethics, 80, 755-769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brammer, S. and A. Millington: 2008, ‘Does it Pay to be Different? An Analysis of the Relationship Between Corporate Social and Financial Performance’, Strategic Management Journal 10 (published online)

  • Brammer, S. And Pavelin, S.: 2006, ‘Corporate Reputation and Social Performance: The Importance of Fit’, Journal of Management Studies, 43(3), 435 – 455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Branco, M.C. and Rodrigues, L.L.: 2006, ‘Corporate social responsibility and resource-based perspectives’, Journal of Business Ethics, 69, 111-132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, L., Grove, S.J. and Kangun N 1993 ‘A content Analysis of Environmental Advertising Campaigns: A Matrix Method Approach’. Journal of Advertising, 22(3): 27–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapple, W., Morrison Paul, C.J. and Harris, R.: 2004, ‘Manufacturing and Corporate Environmental Responsibility: cost implications of voluntary waste minimisation’, Structural Change and Economics Dynamics, 16, 347 – 373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, K. B. and Griliches, Z.: 1984, ‘Productivity growth and R&D at the business level: Results from the PIMS database’, in Z. Griliches (ed.), R&D, Patents, and Productivity, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, 393–416.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cockburn, I. and Z. Griliches: 1988, ‘Industry Effects and Appropriability Measures in the Stock Market’s Valuation of R&D and Patents’, The American Economic Review 78(2), 419–423. Papers and Proceedings of the One-Hundredth Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association (May, 1988)

  • Collis, D. J. and C. A. Montgomery: 1995, ‘Competing on Resources’, Harvard Business Review 73(4), 118–128

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuesta-González, M., Muñoz-Torres, M. J. and Fernandez-Izquierdo, M. A.: 2006, ‘Analysis of social performance in the Spanish financial industry through public data. A proposal’, Journal of Business Ethics, 69, 289-304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dierickx, I., & Cool, K.: 1989, ‘Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage’, Management Science, 35(12), 1504-1511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frankental, P 2001 ‘Corporate Social Responsibility – a PR invention?’. Corporate Communications: An International Journal 6(1): 18-23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardberg, N.A. and Fombrun, C.J.: 2006, ‘Corporate Citizenship: Creating Intangible Assets across Institutional Environments’, Academy of Management Review, 31(2), 329 – 346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gildia, R.L.: 1995, ‘Consumer Survey Confirms Corporate Social Responsibility affects Buying Decisions’, Public Relations Quarterly, 39, 20 – 21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R. M.: 1991, ‘The Resource-Based Theory of Competitive Advantage: Implications for Strategy Formulation’, California Management Review 33, 114–135

    Google Scholar 

  • Graves, S. B. and Waddock, S. A.: 1994, ‘Institutional owners and corporate social performance’, Academy of Management Journal, 37(4), 1035–1046.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griliches, Z.: 1979, ‘Issues in assessing the contribution of R&D to productivity growth’, Bell Journal of Economics, 10(1), 92–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griliches, Z.: 1981, ‘Market value, R&D, and patents’, Economics Letters, 7, 183-87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griliches, Z.: 1998, ‘R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence’, National Bureau of Economic Research for the University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guerard, J. B., Jr., A. S. Bean and S. Andrews: 1987, ‘R&D management and corporate financial policy’, Management Science, 33, 1419–1427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hadlock, P., D. Hecker and J. Gannon: 1991, ‘High Technology Employment: Another View’, Monthly Labor Review, 114, 26–30

  • Hall R.: 1993, ‘A framework linking intangible resources and capabilities to sustainable competitive advantage’, Strategic Management Journal, 14(8), 607–618.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B. H.: 1999, ‘Innovation and Market Value’, National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper, 6984

  • Han JK, Kim N, Srivastava RK.: 1998, ‘Market orientation and organizational performance: is innovation a missing link?’, Journal of Marketing, 62(4), 30–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, J.S. and Freeman, R.E.: 1999, ‘Stakeholders, Social Responsibility, and Performance: Empirical Evidence and Theoretical Perspectives’, Academy of Management Journal, 42(5), 479 – 485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, A. J. and Keim, G. D.: 2001, ‘Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues: what’s the bottom line?’, Strategic Management Journal, 22, 125-139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschey, M.: 1982, ‘Intangible Capital Aspects of Advertising and R & D Expenditures’, The Journal of Industrial Economics, 30(4), 375-390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hitt, M.A., Hoskisson, R.E., Johnson, R.A., Moesel, D.D.: 1996, ‘The Market for corporate control and firm innovation’, Academy of Management Journal, 39(5), 1084-1119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hull, C.E. and Rothenberg, S.: 2008, ‘Firm performance: the interactions of corporate social performance with innovation and industry differentiation’, Strategic Management Journal, 29, 781-789.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe, A. B.: 1986, ‘Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms’ Patents, Profits and Market Value,’ American Economic Review, 76, 984–1001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. A. and D. W. Greening: 1999, ‘The Effects of Corporate Governance and Institutional Ownership Types on Corporate Social Performance’, Academy of Management Journal 42(5), 564–576

    Google Scholar 

  • Kacperczyk, A.: 2008, ‘With Greater Power Comes Greater Responsibility? Takeover Protection and Corporate Attention to Stakeholders’, Strategic Management Journal 30(3), 261–285 (published online)

    Google Scholar 

  • Khaledabadi, H. J. and T. Magnusson: 2008, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility and Knowledge Management Implications in Sustainable Vehicle Innovation and Development’, Communications of the IBIMA, 6

  • Kortum S, Lerner J.: 2000, ‘Assessing the contribution of venture capital to innovation’, RAND Journal of Economics, 31(4), 674–692.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lantos, G. P.: 2001, ‘The boundaries of strategic corporate social responsibility’, Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(7), 595-630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonard, D.: 1995, ‘Wellsprings of Knowledge: Building and Sustaining the Sources of Innovation’, Harvard Business School Press: Boston, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenberg, F. and D. Siegel: 1991, ‘The impact of R&D investment on productivity: New evidence using linked R&D-LRD data’, Economic Inquiry, 29, 203–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackey, A., Mackey, T.B., and Barney, J. B.: 2007, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Performance: Investor Preferences and Corporate Strategies’, The Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 817-835.

    Google Scholar 

  • Márquez, A. and Fombrun, C. J.: 2005, ‘Measuring corporate social responsibility’, Corporate Reputation Review, 7(4), 304-308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A. and Siegel, D.S.: 2000, ‘Corporate social responsibility and firm financial performance’, Strategic Management Journal, 21(5), 602-609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A. and Siegel, D.S.: 2001, ‘Corporate social responsibility: a theory of the firm perspective’, The Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 117-127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A and Siegel, D.S. and Wright, P.M.: 2006, ‘Guest editors’ introduction, Corporate social responsibility: strategic implications’, Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 1-18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, G: 2001, ‘Corporate Social and Financial Performance: An Investigation in the U.K. Supermarket Industry’, Journal of Business Ethics, 34, 299 – 315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicolleti, G. and Scarpetta, S 2003 ‘Regulation, productivity and growth: OECD evidence’, Economic Policy, 18(36):9–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlitzky, M. and Benjamin, J. D.: 2001, ‘Corporate social performance and firm risk: A meta-analytic review’, Business and Society, 40(4), 369-396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penrose, E.: 1959, ‘The theory of the growth of the firm”. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polonsky, M. J., H. T. Suchard and D. Scott: 1997, A Stakeholder Approach to Interacting with the External Environment. Australia and New Zealand Marketing Educators Conference Proceedings, Vol. 1, pp. 495–508

  • Porter, M.E.: 1979, ‘The structure within industries and companies’ performance’, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 61(2), 214-227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E.: 1980, ‘Competitive strategy’, New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G.: 1990, ‘The core competence of the corporation’, Harvard Business Review, 68(3), 79-91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prior, D., Surroca, J., Tribó, J.: 2008, ‘Are socially responsible managers really ethical? Exploring the relationship between earnings management and corporate social responsibility’, Corporate Governance, 16(3), 160-177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quazi, A.: 2003, ‘Identifying the Determinants of Corporate Managers’ Perceived Social Obligations’, Management Decision, 41(9), 822 – 831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quazi, A. and O’Brien, D.: 2000, ‘An Empirical Test of a Cross-national Model of Corporate Social Responsibility’, Journal of Business Ethics, 25, 33 - 51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, P.W. and Dowling, G.R.: 2002, ‘Corporate reputation and sustained superior financial performance’, Strategic Management Journal, 23, 1077-1093.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothenberg, S. and Zyglidopolous, SC.: 2007, ‘Determinants of environmental innovation adoption in the printing industry: the importance of task environment’, Business Strategy and Environment, 16(1), 39-49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russo, M.V and Fouts, P.A.: 1997, ‘A Resource Based Perspective on Corporate Environmental Performance and Profitability’, Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 534-559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schnietz, K. E. and Epstein, M. J.: 2005, ‘Exploring the financial value of a reputation for corporate social responsibility during a crisis’, Corporate Reputation Review, 7(4), 327-345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharfman, M.: 1996, ‘The construct validity of the Kinder, Lydenberg & Domini social performance ratings data’, Journal of Business Ethics, 15(3), 287- 296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D.S. and Vitaliano, D.F.: 2007, ‘An empirical analysis of the strategic use of corporate social responsibility’, Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 16(3), Fall 2007, 773–792.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece D.: 1998, ‘Capturing value from knowledge assets: the new economy, markets for know-how, and intangible assets’, California Management Review, 40(3), 55–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Udayasankar, K.: 2008, ‘Corporate social responsibility and firm size’, Journal of Business Ethics, 83, 167-175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. And Graves, S.: 1997, ‘The corporate social performance – financial performance link’, Strategic Management Journal, 18(4), 303–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wernerfelt, B.: 1984, ‘A resource-based view of the firm’. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171-180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, D., Lynch-Wood, G. and Ramsay, J.: 2006, ‘Drivers of Environmental Behaviour in Manufacturing SMEs and the Implications for CSR’, Journal of Business Ethics, 67, 317 – 330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, Donna J.: 1991, ‘Corporate Social Performance Revisited’, The Academy of Management Review, 16(4), 691-718.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaman, M., S. Yamin, and F. Wong: 1996, Environmental Consumerism and Buying Preference for Green Products. Proceedings of the Australian Marketing Educators’ Conference, pp. 613–626

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universidad de Salamanca, Edificio F. E. S Campus “Miguel de Unamuno”, 37007, Salamanca, Spain

    Robert C. Padgett & Jose I. Galan

Authors
  1. Robert C. Padgett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jose I. Galan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert C. Padgett.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Padgett, R.C., Galan, J.I. The Effect of R&D Intensity on Corporate Social Responsibility. J Bus Ethics 93, 407–418 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0230-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0230-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation