Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Why and How Does Social Responsibility Differ Among SMEs? A Social Capital Systemic Approach

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

Abstract

The existing analysis of heterogeneous social responsibility (SR) in small and medium enterprises (SMEs) has considered the effects of individual factors. However, no holistic analysis has been performed on how different factors of heterogeneity interact and how they collectively affect SR in SMEs. Here, we propose a new systemic approach—employing the social capital concept—with the aim of identifying how and why SR is built diversely in SMEs. In particular, we focus on a positive and holistic perspective that integrates the factors proposed in the literature into the social capital construct. Through a case study of four Spanish SMEs, this article proposes a systemic approach to the study of heterogeneous SR in SMEs.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adler, P. S., & Kwon, S. W. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 17–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Battaglia, M., Bianchi, L., Frey, M., & Iraldo, F. (2010). An innovative model to promote CSR among SMEs operating in industrial clusters: Evidence from an EU project. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 17(3), 133–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonneveaux, E., Calmé, I., & Soparnot, R. (2012). Strategic CSR assets within SMEs: A comparative case study. International Business Research, 5(7), 38–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. (2002). The social capital of structural holes. In M. F. Guillen, R. Collins, P. England, & M. Meyer (Eds.), The new economic sociology. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caldwell, C., Hayes, L. A., Karri, R., & Bernal, P. (2008). Ethical stewardship-implications for leadership and trust. Journal of Business Ethics, 78(1–2), 153–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caldwell, C., & Karri, R. (2005). Organizational Governance and ethical systems: A covenantal approach to building trust. Journal of Business Ethics, 58(1/3), 249–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94(1), 95–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbetta, P. (2003). Metodología y técnicas de investigación social. Madrid: McGraw-Hill/Interamericana de España.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crossan, M., Mazutis, D., & Seijts, G. (2013). In search of virtue: The role of virtues, values and character strengths in ethical decision making. Journal of Business Ethics, 113(4), 567–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enderle, G. (2010). Clarifying the terms of business ethics and CSR. Business Ethics Quarterly, 20(4), 730–732.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flick, U. (2004). Introducción a la investigacióncualitativa. A Coruña: EdicionesMorata, Madrid y FundaciónPaideiaGaliza.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, T., & Tian, Y. (2006). Social and symbolic capital and responsible entrepreneurship: An empirical investigation of SME narratives. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(3), 287–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gellert, F. J., & De Graaf, F. J. (2012). Corporate social responsibility and aging workforces: an explorative study of corporate social responsibility implementation in small-and medium-sized enterprises. Business Ethics: A European Review, 21(4), 353–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godos-Díez, J. L., Fernández-Gago, R., & Martínez-Campillo, A. (2011). How important are CEOs to CSR practices? An analysis of the mediating effect of the perceived role of ethics and social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 98(4), 531–548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hernández, M. (2008). Promoting stewardship behavior in organizations: A leadership model. Journal of Business Ethics, 80(1), 121–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hernández-Sampieri, R., Fernández-Collado, C., & Baptista-Lucio, P. (2006). Metodología de la investigación. México: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrera-Madueño, J., Larrán-Jorge, M., & Martínez-Martínez, D. (2013). Relación entre responsabilidad social y performance en laspequeñas y medianasempresas: revisiónbibliográfica. Cuadernos De Gestión, 13(2), 39–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iturrioz, C., Aragón, C., & Narvaiza, L. (2011). A multidimensional analysis of the heterogeneity of the social responsibility in the small and medium enterprise. Revista Europea de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa, 20(4), 117–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jamali, D., Zanhour, M., & Keshishian, T. (2009). Peculiar strengths and relational attributes of SMEs in the context of CSR. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(3), 355–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, H. (2004). A critique of conventional CSR theory: A SME perspective. Journal of General Management, 9(4), 55–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, H. (2006). Small business champions for corporate responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(3), 241–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, H. (2009). A `business opportunity´ model of corporate social responsibility for small and medium sized enterprises. Business Ethics: A European Review, 18(1), 21–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, W., Leach, M., & Liu, A. (2001). Theory testing using case studies in business-to-business research. Industrial Marketing Management, 30(8), 651–657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kusyk, S. M., & Lozano, J. M. (2007). SME social performance: a four-cell typology of key drivers and barriers on social issues and their implications for stakeholder theory. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Effective Board Performance, 7(4), 502–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lepoutre, J., & Heene, A. (2006). Investigating the impact of firm size on small business social responsibility: a critical review. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(3), 257–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindgreen, A., Swaen, V., & Campbell, T. T. (2010). Corporate Social Responsibility practices in developing and transitional countries: Botswana and Malawi. Journal of Business Ethics, 90(3), 429–440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Longenecker, J. G., Mckinney, J. A., & Moore, C. W. (1989). Ethics in small business. Journal of Small Business Management, 27(1), 27–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Longenecker, J. G., Moore, C. W., Petty, J. W., Palich, L. E., & Mckinney, J. A. (2006). Ethical attitudes in small businesses and large corporations: theory and empirical findings from a tracking study spanning three decades. Journal of Small Business Management, 44(2), 167–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • López-Salazar, A. (2013). Hacia la responsabilidad social empresarial de pequeñas empresas: caso México. Revista Internacional Administración & Finanzas, 6(6), 39–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mababu, R. (2010). Actitudes de los empresarios y directivos hacia la Responsabilidad Social Corporativa. Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones, 26(2), 101–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mankelow, G. (2003). Application of stakeholder theory to investigate small enterprise corporate social responsibility. Doctoral thesis, Southern Cross University, Australia.

  • Manville, B., & Ober, J. (2003). A company of citizens: what the world’s first democracy teaches leaders about creating great organizations?. Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCutcheon, D., & Meredith, J. R. (1993). Conducting case study research in operations management. Journal of Operations Management, 11(3), 239–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGregor, S. P., & Fontrodona, J. (2011). Strategic CSR for SMEs: paradox or possibility? Universia Business Review, 30(2), 80–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mertens, D. M. (2005). Research and evaluation in education and psychology: integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, G., & Spence, L. (2006). Editorial: Responsibility and small business. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(3), 219–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morsing, M., & Perrini, F. (2009). CSR in SMEs: Do SMEs matter for the CSR agenda? Business Ethics: A European Review, 18(1), 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murillo, D., & Lozano, J. (2006). SMEs and CSR: An approach to CSR in their own words. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(3), 227–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murillo, D., & Vallentin, S. (2012). CSR, SMEs and social capital. An empirical study and conceptual reflection. Ramon Llull Journal of Applied Ethics, 3(3), 17–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Narvaiza, L., Ibáñez, A., Aragón, C., & Iturrioz, C. (2009). Developing a scale to measure social responsibility in SMEs. In D. Crowther & G. Aras (Eds.), CSR and SMEs. Research series: Issues in corporate behaviour and sustainability. Leicester: Social Responsibility Research Network.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, A. E., & Thomsen, C. (2009). Investigating CSR communication in SMEs: A case study among Danish middle managers. Business ethics: A European review, 18(1), 83–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ortiz Avram, D., & Kühne, S. (2008). Implementing responsible business behaviour from a strategic management perspective: developing a framework for Austrian SMEs. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(1), 463–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perrini, F. (2006). SMEs and CSR theory: Evidence and implications from an Italian perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(3), 305–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perrini, F., & Minoja, M. (2008). Strategizing corporate social responsibility: Evidence from an Italian medium-sized; family-owned company. Business Ethics: A European Review, 17(1), 47–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preuss, L., & Perschke, J. (2010). Slipstreaming the larger boats: Social responsibility in medium sized business. Journal of Business Ethics, 92(4), 531–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. D., Leonardi, R., & Nanetti, R. Y. (1993). Making democracy work. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quazi, A. M., & O’Brien, D. (2000). An empirical test or a cross-national model of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 25(1), 33–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz Olabuenaga, J. I. (1999). Metodología de la investigación cualitativa (2nd ed.). Bilbao: Universidad de Deusto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russo, A., & Perrini, F. (2010). Investigating stakeholder theory and social capital: CSR in large firms and SMEs. Journal of Business Ethics, 91(2), 207–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russo, A., & Tencati, A. (2009). Formal vs. informal CSR strategies: evidence from Italian micro, small, medium-sized and large firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(2), 339–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sacconi, L., & Degli Antoni, G. (2008). A theoretical analysis of the relationship between social capital and corporate social responsibility: concepts and definitions. Discussion Paper 13, Universita Degli Studi di Trento, Dipartamento di Economia.

  • Sen, S., & Cowley, J. (2013). The relevance of stakeholder theory and social capital theory in the context of CSR in SMEs: An Australian perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 118(2), 413–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. J. (1999). Does size matter? The state of the art in small business ethics. Business Ethics: A European Review, 8(3), 163–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. J. (2007). CSR and small business in a European policy context: The five “C”s of CSR and small business research agenda 2007. Business and Society Review, 112(4), 533–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. J., & Lozano, J. F. (2000). Communicating about ethics with small firms: Experiences from the U.K. and Spain. Journal of Business Ethics, 27(1), 43–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. J., & Rutherfoord, R. (2003). Small business and empirical perspectives in business ethics: Editorial. Journal of Business Ethics, 47(1), 1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. J., Schimdpeter, R., & Habisch, A. (2003). Assessing social capital: Small and medium sized enterprises in Germany and the UK. Journal of Business Ethics, 47(1), 17–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. J., & Schmidpeter, R. (2003). SMEs, social capital and the common good. Journal of Business Ethics, 45(1/2), 93–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vives, A., Corral, A., & Isusi, I. (2005). Responsabilidad social de la empresa en las pymes de Latinoamérica. Washington: Interamerican Development Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vyakarnam, S., Bailey, A., Myers, A., & Burnett, D. (1997). Towards an understanding of ethical behaviour in small firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(15), 1625–1636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Worthington, I., Ram, M., & Jones, T. (2006). Exploring corporate social responsibility in the U.K. Asian small business company. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(2), 201–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (1989). Case study research. Design and methods, applied social research methods series, vol. 5. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zikmund, W. G. (2003). Fundamentos de investigación de mercados (2nd ed.). Madrid: International Thomson Editores Spain Paraninfo.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Thanks are due to the SMEs’ leaders and members that have provided the required evidences for this paper, and we acknowledge financial support from the Basque Government Department of Education Language Policy and Culture.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Deusto Business School, University of Deusto, Mundaiz, 50, 20012, San Sebastián, Spain

    Cristina Aragón, Lorea Narvaiza & Maite Altuna

Authors
  1. Cristina Aragón
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lorea Narvaiza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maite Altuna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lorea Narvaiza.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Aragón, C., Narvaiza, L. & Altuna, M. Why and How Does Social Responsibility Differ Among SMEs? A Social Capital Systemic Approach. J Bus Ethics 138, 365–384 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2632-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2632-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation