Benchmarking of corporate social responsibility: Methodological problems and robustness

Graafland, J.J. and Eijffinger, S.C.W. and Smid, H. (2004): Benchmarking of corporate social responsibility: Methodological problems and robustness. Published in: Journal of Business Ethics , Vol. 1-2, No. 53 (2004): pp. 137-152.

Abstract

This paper investigates the possibilities and problems of benchmarking Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). After a methodological analysis of the advantages and problems of benchmarking, we develop a benchmark method that includes economic, social and environmental aspects as well as national and international aspects of CSR. The overall benchmark is based on a weighted average of these aspects. The weights are based on the opinions of companies and NGO’s. Using different methods of weighting, we find that the outcome of the benchmark is rather robust for a sample of more than 50 large Dutch companies.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Benchmarking; corporate social responsibility; sensitivity analysis; stakeholder perspective; transparency; triple P bottom line
• Subjects: M - Business Administration and Business Economics ; Marketing ; Accounting ; Personnel Economics > M1 - Business Administration > M14 - Corporate Culture ; Diversity ; Social Responsibility; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C4 - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics > C49 - Other; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C8 - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology ; Computer Programs > C89 - Other

References

Anderson, E.: 1993, Value in Ethics and Economics (Harvard University Press, Cambridge/London)

Chryssides, G. and J.H. Kaler: 1993, An introduction to business ethics (Chapman & Hall, London)

Erp, H. van: 2000, Moraal geluk en verantwoordelijkheid (Van Gorcum, Assen)

Eijffinger, S.C.W. and P.M. Geraats: 2002, ‘How transparent are central banks?’, CEPR Discussion Paper, Centre for Economic Policy Research, London.

Graafland, Johan J.: 2002, ‘Modelling the trade off between profits and principles’, De Economist 150, 129-54

Graafland, J.J.. B.W. van de Ven and N. Stoffele: 2002, ‘Wat betekent maatschappelijk ondernemen concreet?’, University of Tilburg, www.uvt.nl/wijsbegeerte/cmo

Graafland, J.J.. B.W. van de Ven and N. Stoffele: 2003, ‘Strategies and instruments for organising CSR by small and large business in the Netherlands’, Journal of Business Ethics 47, 33, 45-60

Graafland, J.J., S.C.W.Eijffinger, N.C.G.M. Stoffele, H.Smid and A.M. Coldeweijer, 2003 Corporate social responsibility of Dutch companies: Benchmarking and Transparency, http://www.uvt.nl/faculteiten/fww/cmo

Graves, S.B., S.A.Waddock and J. Kelly: 2002, ‘100 Best Corporate Citizens’, Business Ethics 11(2), 8-13

Hausman, D.M.: 1992, The inexact and separate science of economics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)

Hurka, T.: 1996, ‘Monism, Pluralism, and Rational Regret’, Ethics: an International Journal of Social, Political and Legal Philosophy 106(3), 555-575

Jeurissen, R.J.M. (ed.): 2000, Bedrijfsethiek: een goed zaak (Van Gorcum, Assen)

Jonker, J. (ed.): 2000, AA 1000 standaard: richtlijn voor maatschappelijk verantwoord ondernemen (Van Gorcum, Assen)

Kleinfeld, A.: 2001, ‘Benchmarking the moral decision-making strength of European biotech companies: A European research project’, Business Ethics: A European Review 10, pp. 122-139

Krut, R. and K. Munis: 1998, ‘Sustainable Industrial Development: Benchmarking Environmental Policies and Reports’, Greener Management International 21, 88-98

Laat, P.B. de: 2001, ‘Open source software: A new Mertonian ethos?’, in: A. Vedder (ed.), Ethics and the Internet (Intersentia, Antwerpen-Groningen-Oxford), pp. 33-47

MacLean, D.: 1994, ‘Cost-Benefit Analysis and Procedural Values’, Analyse & Kritik, 16(2), 166-180

McIntosh, M., D. Leipziger, K. Jones and G. Coleman: 1998, Corporate citizenship: Successful strategies for responsible companies (Financial Times Pitman Publishing, London/San Francisco)

Peperstraten, F. van: 1999, Samenleving ter discussie (Coutinho, Bussum)

PriceWaterhouseCoopers: Ondernemingsanalyses 2001, Trends in de chemie (Elsevier bedrijfsinformatie B.V., Dordrecht)

PriceWaterhouseCoopers: Ondernemingsanalyses 2002a, Trends in de bouw (Elsevier bedrijfsinformatie B.V., Dordrecht)

PriceWaterhouseCoopers: Ondernemingsanalyses 2002b, Trends in de retail (Elsevier bedrijfsinformatie B.V., Dordrecht)

PriceWaterhouseCoopers: Ondernemingsanalyses 2002c, Trends bij banken (Elsevier bedrijfsinformatie B.V., Dordrecht)

Social Economic Council: 2001, Corporate social responsibility: a Dutch approach (Van Gorcum, Assen)

Velasquez, M.G.: 1998, Business ethics. Concepts and cases, Fourth edition (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey)

Vlek, C.A.J., E.M.Steg, D. Feenstra, W. Gerbens-Leenis, S. Lindenberg, H. Moll, A. Schoot Uiterkamp, F. Sijtsma and A. Van Witteloostuijn: 2002, ‘Een praktisch model voor duurzaam bedrijfspresteren’, Economisch Statistische Berichten 87, 524-527

Waddock, S. A. and S. B. Graves: 1997, ‘The corporate social performance-financial performance link’, Strategic Management Journal, 303-19 1 These problems are also apparent in benchmarking, for example, the transparency