The financial crisis and the subsequent economic downturn represent a signifi- cant upheaval in the evolution of mar- kets and the private sector. Restoring trust and confidence, and shifting to a long-term paradigm of economic value creation in the spirit of universal values should therefore be viewed as the cen- tral imperatives. To restore momentum towards sustainable and inclusive global integration, it is more important than ever to build market legitimacy and political support based on sound ethical frameworks such as the UN Global Compact. (The Global Economic Downturn, 2008)
Similarly, Tim Smith of Walden Asset Management noted that work on corporate responsibility issues does not stop just because were in a finan- cial crisis . . . more attention is being paid to the fact that social, environmental and ethical issues have an impact on financial value (Hyatt, 2008). These state- ments are consistent with results from surveys that found that 91% of CEOs report that corporate social responsibility management creates shareholder value, and 80% of CEOs agree that nonfinancial indicators such as environmental and social performance met- rics are essential to characterizing future financial performance (S. L. Friedman, 2003).
There is also evidence that emphasis on organiza- tional responsibility is increasing worldwide. For example, Holcomb et al. (2007) reported that 90% of corporate Web pages address at least one issue related to organizational responsibility (e.g., com- munity involvement, environmental concerns, pub- lic educational support), and more than 65% of the worlds largest companies use the Internet to report on organizational responsibility issues. Similarly, of the Fortune Global 250 firms (the first half of the Fortune Global 500), 161 have published nonfinan- cial reports addressing sustainability and corporate social responsibility issues (Fortanier & Kolk, 2007).
Other data that are likely to be less subjective in nature also point to the benefits of organizational responsibility. For example, a study of 602 compa- nies in the Morgan Stanley Capital International World Index that have been included in the Oekom Corporate Responsibility Ratings showed that the 186 companies that received the highest responsibil- ity ratings outperformed the 416 companies that received the lowest ratings by 23.4% between January 2000 and October 2003 (Hollender, 2004). The Oekom ratings are based on the Frankfurt- Hohenheim Guidelines, which are criteria used to evaluate companies, and even countries, along the environmental, social, and cultural sustainability dimensions (Hoffmann, Scherhorn, & Dpfner, 2000). The Frankfurt-Hohenheim Guidelines are often referred to as the worlds most comprehensive set of criteria for the ethical assessment of compa- nies, and they are based on 200 sector-specific indi- cators (Baue, 2004) related to the dimensions and indicators included in Table 24.1.
Another comprehensive study that used objective organizational performance data is a meta-analysis of 52 independent studies demonstrating that there is a positive relationship between social/environmental performance and financial performance (Orlitzky, Schmidt, & Rynes, 2003). This meta-analysis found an average correlation between corporate social/ environmental performance and corporate financial performance of = .36. This correlation was obtained after correcting for sampling error and measurement error in the predictor and criterion measures and was based on 388 separate correlations and a total sample size of 33,878. The average relationship between cor-
Organizational Responsibility
863
11890-24_Ch24-rev3.qxd 5/3/10 10:06 AM Page 863
Co py
ri gh
t Am
er ic
an P sy
ch ol og ic al A ss oc ia ti on . No t fo r fu
rt he
r di
st ri
bu ti
on .
porate social/environmental performance and finan- cial performance remained positive when it excluded correlations computed using reputation measures for social/environmental performance and surveys for financial performance (i.e., = .15). In addition, a separate meta-analysis (using part of the same data- base) found that this relationship does not depend on firm size (Orlitzky, 2001). It is also noteworthy that the average correlation between social performance and financial performance was = .47, whereas the average correlation between environmental perfor- mance and financial performance was = .13. In sum, there is a universally positive relationship between social and environmental performance and financial performance, but the strength of this posi- tive relationship varies depending on how one opera- tionalizes social and/or environmental performance and financial performance.
In a study using a different methodological approach, Ambec and Lanoie (2008) conducted an extensive qualitative literature review focusing exclusively on the benefits of environmentally responsible practices. The overall conclusion was that benefits of such practices are related to both increased revenues and cost reduction through separate mechanisms. Specifically, better environ- mental performance is related to increased rev- enues owing to better access to certain markets, better product differentiation, and better pollution- control technology. Also, better environmental per- formance is related to a reduction in cost owing to better risk management and relations with external stakeholders, lower cost of material, energy, and services, lower cost of capital, and lower cost of labor.
Numerous organizations are very much aware of the benefits of being responsible. This is why many create a position of corporate responsibility officer (Marshall & Heffes, 2007). However, although this specific title exists, more common titles are vice presi- dent or director of corporate social responsibility. Regardless of the title, which can also be chief com- pliance officer, chief ethics officer, or investor rela- tions officer (Marshall & Heffes, 2007), the point is that organizational responsibility is seen as an impor- tant ingredient of business strategy. Job announce- ments for such positions include a variety of
responsibilities addressing both strategic and opera- tional issues, such as the following:
work collaboratively with internal business part- ners to communicate the human rights compli- ance program expectations;
facilitate regular update meetings with key inter- nal partners;
develop and maintain strong industry relation- ships to benchmark best practices;
use benchmarking and research skills to identify and communicate risks and challenges that can affect the brand;
create a unified innovative approach to green and community impact initiatives;
adopt operating policies that exceed compliance with social and environmental laws;
develop relationships and interact successfully with senior executives;
provide corporate social responsibility consulta- tion and project management services to brand name customers;
conduct training for corporate social responsibil- ity monitoring firms, suppliers, and brand names and provide support to internal and external training programs;
interact with a cross-functional set of internal departments (Communications, Finance, Human Resources, Operations, Operations Services, Marketing, Sales, and Transportation) and outside customers and represent the com- pany regarding organizational responsibility issues; and
work with both internal and external resources to identify opportunities and projects that allow us to improve our sustainability position.
IMPLEMENTING ORGANIZATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY: STRATEGIC RESPONSIBILITY MANAGEMENT
Now that we have defined organizational responsibil- ity and described its benefits on the basis of several different sources and data collection methods, the next question is, How do we implement organization- ally responsible policies and actions? First, it is clear that there is an important risk for organizations in
Herman Aguinis
864
11890-24_Ch24-rev3.qxd 5/3/10 10:06 AM Page 864
Co py
ri gh
t Am
er ic
an P sy
ch ol og ic al A ss oc ia ti on . No t fo r fu
rt he
r di
st ri
bu ti
on .
terms of their reputations of communicating about organizational responsibility and not doing enough (Hillenbrand & Money, 2007; see also chap. 10, this volume). However, implementation is not easy. Essentially, it is an organizational change process that requires commitment, time, and resources. organiza- tional responsibility is an ongoing process and should not be viewed as separate from overall organizational strategy (Molteni, 2006), just as I/O psychology research on diversity or ethics cannot be separated and isolated as initiatives that emanate from, and are owned by, the diversity or ethics department or unit (e.g., Kravitz et al., 1997). Implementing orga- nizational responsibility means that all policies and actions are affected throughout the entire organiza- tion and at all levels of analysis (i.e., individual, group, and organization). Moreover, Davis (2004) argued that we should do away with the expression corporate social responsibility because it gives the impression that it is something separate from strategy and from the reality of a business.
Implementing organizational responsibility is dif- ferent from making the naive recommendation that organizations need to be managed democratically in the sense that a majority of stakeholder votes wins. As noted by Dalton, Hitt, Certo, and Dalton (2007), it is not sensible that a large corporation be managed by consensus, as there are few enterprise equivalents to the town hall meetings (p. 37). Also, walking the talk of organizational responsibility does not suggest that economic performance, or other nonfinancial indicators directly related to an organizations prod- ucts and services (e.g., citizenship satisfaction),
should not be an organizations primary goal; after all, this is the reason for its existence. This chapter argues that capitalism with a human face (Leisinger, 2007) is not only the right thing to do, but it is also good for business.
Embracing organizational responsibility requires a cultural change similar to embracing performance excellence (Aguinis & Pierce, 2008) or quality (Waddock, Bodwell, & Graves, 2000). Organizational responsibility is not something an organization sim- ply does; it is what an organization is. It provides a road map for making decisions about new markets and products, processes, and initiatives. As such, the implementation of organization-wide initiatives that have been informed by I/O psychology research, such as performance management (Aguinis, 2009) or total quality management (Waddock et al., 2000), provides a useful model that can be extrapolated, adapted, and labeled strategic responsibility management. Strategic responsibility management includes the following sequence of steps (see Figure 24.1):
Step 1: Creating a vision and values related to responsibility
Step 2: Identifying expectations through stake- holders dialogue and prioritizing them
Step 3: Developing initiatives that are integrated with corporate strategy
Step 4: Raising internal awareness through employee training
Step 5: Institutionalizing strategic responsibility management as a way of doing business on an ongoing basis by measuring and rewarding processes and results
Organizational Responsibility
865
Vision and values related to OR
Identification and prioritization of stakeholders expectations
Development of OR initiatives that are integrated with corporate strategy
Employee training related to OR
Institutionalization of SRM by measuring and rewarding processes and results
Reporting on OR initiatives internally and externally
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6
FIGURE 24.1. Sequence of steps involved in strategic responsibility management (SRM). OR organizational responsibility.
11890-24_Ch24-rev3.qxd 5/3/10 10:06 AM Page 865
Co py
ri gh
t Am
er ic
an P sy
ch ol og ic al A ss oc ia ti on . No t fo r fu
rt he
r di
st ri
bu ti
on .
Step 6: Reporting on the status of the dialogue and the initiatives through a yearly organiza- tional responsibility report that is made avail- able internally and externally
I/O psychology researchers and practitioners are in a unique position to create and disseminate know- ledge on how to best implement strategic responsi- bility management. First, there is a need to create a shared vision and set of values about responsibility. Organizations cannot go down the organizational responsibility path without considering managements personal values. Like any other organization-wide intervention (Aguinis, 1993), organizational responsi- bility requires championship from senior manage- ment and organization-wide ownership (Middlemiss, 2003). There are several reviews of the I/O psychology literature (e.g., Vol. 3, chap. 20, this handbook), as well as sources in fields such as executive education (e.g., Mirvis, 2008), that address the issues of organi- zational change and the importance of considering managements personal values in this process.
Second, stakeholder engagement is crucial, but we need to define how and to what extent and in what capacity stakeholders are engaged (Greenwood, 2007). We also need to define how various organiza- tional responsibility policies and actions are directly related to each stakeholder group. These are areas to which I/O psychology can clearly contribute given the vast literature on employee engagement (e.g., Maslach & Leiter, 2008). In terms of the identifica- tion of stakeholders, they can be mapped on a chart to indicate their relative importance, and manage- ment can prioritize organizational responsibility issues based on how likely they are to affect the busi- ness (Hillenbrand & Money, 2007). For example, Table 24.2 includes a set of business principles as well as specific policies and actions related to various stakeholders at Orange Communications Switzerland (2002). Orange Communications Switzerland is a subsidiary of the France Telecom Group and the second largest provider of mobile telephony in Switzerland, with more than 1.5 million customers and 1,000 full-time employees (Key Figures, 2009). The company acknowledges that
every company impacts on different groups of persons, society and the envi-
ronment. Corporate Social Responsibility considers these impacts of business on society, and seeks opportunities to com- bine business objectives with social growth. CSR is a cross-functional activity with deep strategic implications, and stretches across a variety of fields and activities. . . . The commitment to cor- porate social responsibility is a strategic decision, deliberately chosen outside of any legal obligations. This is opening a new dimension of doing business, and shows gradually new and challenging perspectives for the relation between business and society. (Corporate Social Responsibility, 2009)
Table 24.2 provides useful information in terms of the stakeholder groups related to the various prin- ciples. Also, this table addresses the third step in the strategic responsibility management process men- tioned above, because organizational responsibility is fully integrated into the organizations strategy. In other words, being responsible is fully integrated within general business principles, and organiza- tional responsibility initiatives are not seen as sepa- rate from the organizations core strategic initiatives.
The fourth step includes training of all organiza- tional members all the way up to top management about organizational responsibility and responsibility management. This training can include how strategic responsibility management works, what is expected of employees, and how employees will benefit from strategic responsibility management. In terms of spe- cific content, at a minimum, training should provide answers to the following questions (Aguinis, 2009):
What is strategic responsibility management? Answering this question involves providing gen- eral information about strategic responsibility management, how it is implemented in other organizations, and its general goals.
How does strategic responsibility management fit in our strategy? To answer this question, training should include information on the relationship between strategic responsibility management and strategic planning. Specifi- cally, information is provided on how strategic
Herman Aguinis
866
11890-24_Ch24-rev3.qxd 5/3/10 10:06 AM Page 866
Co py
ri gh
t Am
er ic
an P sy
ch ol og ic al A ss oc ia ti on . No t fo r fu
rt he
r di
st ri
bu ti
on .
Organizational Responsibility
867
TABLE 24.2
Stakeholders, Illustrative General Business Principles, and Illustrative Specific Policies and Actions at Orange Communications Switzerland (2002)
Stakeholders General business principles Specific policies and actions
Employees and contractual partners
Customers
Communities
Suppliers
Environment and all stakeholders
Courses to ensure a safe working environment and to increase knowledge in order to prevent occupational accidents
Five-day paternity leave and paid birth and child benefits for all employees, although this is not a general requirement throughout Switzerland
Ethical principles and any conduct in the team in violation of our values are evaluated and handled as part of the manage- ment by objectives process (individual objectives)
Courses available on the Intranet on worklife balance Tetanus immunization offered to all field staff
The three PostPay price plansPrima, Optima, and Maximaare based on comprehensive knowledge of the needs of mobile technology users.
Brochure about responsible mobile phone usage available at sales outlets
Regular product training sessions for employees and special marketing campaigns
Scorange customer service survey Establish a relationship of trust by concentrating on three
areas: (a) protection of personal information (data protection), (b) confidential handling of all correspondence, and (c) pro- tection from unwanted messages and spam.
Corporate volunteering program in all regions in which Orange is represented
Participation in information events, discussion groups, and public hearings at the request of interest groups and/or communities
Monitor everyday concerns of laymen and analyze them together with experts
Suppliers and contractors follow principles similar to our own Clarity in our supplier contracts and honor-agreed payment
terms
Use of scientific research for risk identification regarding mobile technology, base stations, and terminals
Support of independent studies by the Swiss Research Foundation on Mobile Communication at the Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich
We monitor any developments with regard to laws, regula- tions, and provisions that affect the interests of the company and interest groups and adjust company regulations and procedures accordingly
We cut paper consumption my making double-sided printing the standard and promoting the use of electronic billing
We limit business trips by plane and promote the use of telephone and video conferences
When buying new phones, customers can return their old phones for credit
We provide our employees and contractual partners with a healthy, fair, and safe work environment.
We support every employee, throughout their working life, in the development of skills that promote both personal and professional development.
We promote a working environment of mutual respect, joint responsibility, and trust, and free of any form of harassment.
We provide our customers with quality, added value, and excellent service.
We implement responsible marketing processes.
We support the communities in which our offices are located and actively foster an open dialogue with them.
We develop honest and transparent rela- tionships with suppliers.
We take our responsibility to the environ- ment very seriously.
11890-24_Ch24-rev3.qxd 5/3/10 10:06 AM Page 867
Co py
ri gh
t Am
er ic
an P sy
ch ol og ic al A ss oc ia ti on . No t fo r fu
rt he
r di
st ri
bu ti
on .
responsibility management is directly related to the organizations strategic goals.
Whats in it for me? A good training program describes the benefits of implementing strategic responsibility management for all those involved.
The I/O psychology literature provides important insights regarding the principles that can be imple- mented to maximize the effectiveness of such training (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009). These recommendations and best practices will be useful in designing, deliver- ing, and evaluating the effectiveness of the training program (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009).
The fifth step addresses the consequences associ- ated with organizational responsibility. This includes creating indicators of success and describing how each indicator will be assessed, together with the clear consequences based on the results. For example, an indicator of stakeholder engagement is the extent to which the communication between staff members as well as with customers and other stakeholders is honest and complete (Hollender, 2004). Additional indicators are included in Table 24.1 and Exhibit 24.1, as described earlier. Thus, the organizations perfor- mance management system must measure and reward organizational responsibility policies and actions. Many organizations are already doing so. For example, data on 90 publicly traded companies in Canada show that long-term compensation of CEOs is associated with organizational responsibility actions related to products (Mahoney & Thorne, 2005). Once again, the field of I/O psychology has produced an important body of knowledge that can be used to create performance management systems that include specific information on how to measure organizational responsibility processes and outcomes (Aguinis, 2009), as well as clear links between organizational responsibility and rewards at the individual, team, and organizational levels (Aguinis, 2009; see also Vol. 1, chap. 11, Vol. 2, chap. 9, this handbook).
Finally, the last step involves reporting organiza- tional activities related to organizational responsibil- ity (see chap. 7, this volume). This reporting can include corporate financial reporting, corporate gov- ernance, organizational responsibility, and reporting stakeholder value creation. This is also consistent
with integrating organizational responsibility within the organizations overall strategy (Bhimani & Soonawalla, 2005).
The next section of the chapter describes exam- ples of organizations that have implemented one or more of the strategic responsibility management steps described above. This particular set of examples rep- resent organizations that offer very different products and services, thereby illustrating the implementation of organizational responsibility initiatives in a diver- sity of contexts.
SOME ILLUSTRATIONS
The Body Shop An organization known for its organizational respon- sibility approach is The Body Shop, a global manufac- turer and retailer of more than 1,200 beauty and cosmetic products founded in the United Kingdom in 1976, which now has more than 2,500 stores in 55 countries (http://www.thebodyshop-usa.com/ bodyshop/beauty/about-us). The Body Shops organi- zational responsibility activities focus on promoting environmental protection and respect for human rights. The Body Shops vision and values are clearly integrated with organizational responsibility. Specifically, The Body Shop
has been a leader in the trend towards greater corporate transparency, and has been a force for positive social and envi- ronmental change through its lobbying and campaigning programs around five core principles: Support Community Trade, Defend Human Rights, Against Animal Testing, Activate Self-Esteem, and Protect Our Planet. We set our- selves and our business partners clear standards of business practice, engage stakeholders with our aims, and report on our performance and our intent to improve within the overall context of our business. As a retailer, we believe that we can be a force for positive social and environmental change by campaign- ing on issues that are directly relevant to our consumers and/or our industry. The
Herman Aguinis
868
11890-24_Ch24-rev3.qxd 5/3/10 10:06 AM Page 868
Co py
ri gh
t Am
er ic
an P sy
ch ol og ic al A ss oc ia ti on . No t fo r fu
rt he
r di
st ri
bu ti
on .
Body Shop believes that business has a responsibility to the communities in which it operates, so we support and encourage employees throughout the world to volunteer their time in local action. (The Body Shop: Company Profile, 2009)
In addition, the Body Shop strives to protect this beautiful planet and the people who depend on it not because its fashionable, but based on the belief that its the only way to do business (Natures Way to Beautiful, 2009).
The Body Shop reports evidence that these value statements have led to concrete actions (Natures Way to Beautiful, 2009). For example, in 2007, The Body Shop became the first cosmetics company to source sustainably harvested palm oil and introduce it into the beauty industry, working in partnership with a certified organic producer in Colombia. In 2008, the company introduced 100% postconsumer recycled bottles, and all their polyethylene terephthalate bottles currently contain at least 30% recycled material. In addition, the companys unique Community Trade program creates sustainable trading relationships with disadvantaged communities around the world and provides essential income to more than 25,000 people across the globe. In sum, although there is some evi- dence regarding the implementation of the other steps in the strategic responsibility management process, The Body Shop is an excellent example of the imple- mentation of the first step: creating a vision and values related to responsibility.
MGM Grand As a second example, consider how some of the strategic responsibility management steps were implemented at the MGM Grand in Las Vegas when it opened more than 10 years ago (T. Jones, Fried, & Nazarechuk, 1994). The MGM Grand is one of the worlds largest hotel, casino, and theme parks, and it faced an incredible staffing challenge before it could open: The company needed to hire 7,000 employees who were competent, well trained, and guest ori- ented. The pool of applicants was estimated to include about 100,000 individuals. The challenge was even greater because two other megaresorts,
Treasure Island at the Mirage and the Luxor Hotel and Casino, opened within two months of the open- ing of the MGM.
Consistent with its vision of a community serv- ing a community (T. Jones et al., 1994, p. 2; Step 1), the expectations of the local community (Step 2), and its strategic staffing needs (Step 3), the company implemented an initiative called Employment Outreach Program (EOP), which meant that of the 7,000 job openings, 1,200 were reserved for economi- cally disadvantaged individuals. EOP was an initiative that was clearly embedded within the organizations overall strategy (i.e., the MGM could not operate without adequate staff) and driven by the companys values: a combination of altruism and enlightened corporate self-interest (T. Jones et al., 1994, p. 2). MGM received a tax credit for 40% of training costs from a minimum of 4 weeks to a maximum of 12 weeks depending on the type of job. Training was done on the job, so this tax break was essentially a tax break on wages.
What were some of the results of this initiative? Exactly 1,207 individuals were hired by MGM, and 255 were hired through other satellite recruiting pro- grams. The total subsidy that MGM received in terms of estimated wage credits and training costs was about $500,000. About three quarters of the individu- als hired through EOP worked full time, and total projected annual wages, including tips and benefits, were about $30 million. This initiative was a resound- ing success for the MGM, the states taxpayers, and the surrounding community: MGM was able to find qualified employees, and new jobs were created, which benefited MGM and those hired directly and the surrounding community indirectly.
Chiquita Chiquita Brands International, Inc., is an interesting additional illustration because of the companys his- tory of alleged abuses and, in a sense, being known for decades as the opposite of a responsible organi- zation (Werre, 2003). Known primarily for its bananas, Chiquita produces and distributes fresh and processed foods and generates annual revenues of more than $2 billion. Chiquitas banana division includes 20,000 employees from primarily about 130 farms in Guatemala, Honduras, Costa Rica,
Organizational Responsibility
869
11890-24_Ch24-rev3.qxd 5/3/10 10:06 AM Page 869
Co py
ri gh
t Am
er ic
an P sy
ch ol og ic al A ss oc ia ti on . No t fo r fu
rt he
r di
st ri
bu ti
on .
Panama, and Colombia. Chiquitas predecessors, the United Fruit Company and the United Brands Company, had a century-old history of influence on the lives of their employees and governments because they created thousands of jobs and built railroads, houses, hospitals, and ports. Because of its wide- spread influenceincluding the alleged participation in suppressing labor rights in Colombia in 1928, the use of company ships to help overthrow the Guate- malan government in 1954, and bribery scandals in Honduras in 1975the United Fruit Company was known as the Octopus.
Since the early 1990s, Chiquita has implemented a major strategic shift and now embraces organizational responsibility. As would be expected, this move was initially seen as a public relations campaign. However, in 1998 Chiquita started to implement a strategic responsibility management program. Specifically, at that time organizational responsibility was not a major consideration at Chiquita, but in May 1998 the Cincinnati Enquirer published 22 notes, all at once, describing the organization as a rapacious, exploitative company without a conscience. It turned out that some of the information published in these articles had been obtained through illegally taped voicemail messages, and the Enquirer published an apology (three times) and agreed to pay $10 mil- lion in exchange for settlement of claims against it by Chiquita (An Apology to Chiquita, 1998). However, the scandal forced senior management to take a closer look at their companys vision and values. Chiquitas CEO, Steve Warshaw, led an eight-member Senior Management Group for Corporate Responsibility, which was supported by a Corporate Responsibility Steering Committee, which includes eight directors from different operational areas. Showing the strategic importance of the issue, Warshaw dropped in at almost every meeting of the Steering Committee. As a result, the following vision statement was created:
Being the industry leader in the future requires more than delivering a high quality product: Stakeholders (and espe- cially customers) will increasingly place great value on corporate responsibility performance. Chiquita therefore envi- sions to lead the industry in the area of CR. (Werre, 2003, p. 248)
Following the new vision (i.e., Step 1 in the strategic responsibility management process) and through the input of about 1,000 employees, Chiquita adopted a set of four core values, which integrate business strategy with organizational responsibility and now guide policies and actions at the company:
Integrity: We live by our core values. We com- municate in an open, honest and straightforward manner. We conduct our business ethically and lawfully.
Respect: We treat people fairly and respectfully. We recognize the importance of family in the lives of our employees. We value and benefit from indi- vidual and cultural differences. We foster individ- ual expression, open dialogue and a sense of belonging.
Opportunity: We believe the continuous growth and development of our employees is key to our success. We encourage teamwork. We recognize employees for their contributions to the com- panys success.
Responsibility: We take pride in our work, in our products, and in satisfying our customers. We act responsibly in the communities and environments in which we live and work. We are accountable for the careful use of all resources entrusted to us and for providing appropriate returns for our shareholders.
As a result of the new vision and values (Step 1 in strategic responsibility management) and stakeholder input (Step 2), several initiatives were developed that integrate general business strategy with organiza- tional responsibility (Step 3). For example, in May 2000 Chiquita appointed a full-time vice president and corporate responsibility officer. In addition, in 2001 and 2002 training and communication were extended to include all Chiquita employees working at farms in Latin America, including materials in Spanish (Step 4). Moreover, to institutionalize change (Step 5), another important action was to expand the code of conduct to include food safety, labor standards, employee health and safety, community involvement, environmental protection, ethical behavior, and legal compliance. Also related to measuring processes and results (i.e., also Step 5),
Herman Aguinis
870
11890-24_Ch24-rev3.qxd 5/3/10 10:06 AM Page 870
Co py
ri gh
t Am
er ic
an P sy
ch ol og ic al A ss oc ia ti on . No t fo r fu
rt he
r di
st ri
bu ti
on .
Chiquita reached an important milestone when each of its 127 company-owned banana farms was certified following the standards of the Rainforest Alliances Better Banana Project. Finally, in terms of reporting (i.e., Step 6), Chiquita published its first Corporate Responsibility report in 2001, and the 2006 report is now available (Corporate Responsibility, 2006).
What are some of the results of Chiquitas imple- mentation of strategic responsibility management in terms of the triple bottom line? Regarding economic performance, although a conclusion regarding direct causality is difficult to establish, several major European retailers have now chosen Chiquita as their banana supplier, health insurance costs have been lowered, and better industrial relations provide bene- fits in terms of quality improvements and reduced disruption caused by strikes and labor stoppages. In terms of social performance, many workers were able to switch from temporary to permanent employment with associated compensation and benefits, and the number of accidents has been decreased substantially (e.g., by more than 40% in Costa Rica). Finally, in terms of environmental performance, the use of pesti- cides has been reduced, 80% of plastic is being recy- cled (up from 0% in the past), more than 700,000 new trees have been planted for water conservation, and several buffer zones and biological corridors have been created. In short, Chiquitas implementation of strategic responsibility management has resulted in tangible benefits for the organization, its communi- ties, and the environment.
Other Illustrations There are countless additional examples of organiza- tions adopting some type of strategic responsibility management initiative (e.g., Enderle, 2004). For example, Microsoft has a 21st Century Skills for Employability program, which entails partnering with governments, the education sector, and community groups to help individuals develop skills that will allow them to become more employable (Bonfiglioni, Moir, & Ambrosini, 2006). This initiative not only benefited the local communities and created goodwill toward Microsoft, but it also made the economic con- text attractive and helped the company with its long-term business development. As another illus- tration, the tax-collecting organization in the United
Kingdom, HRM Revenue & Customs, recently decided to print tax-return forms in languages other than English. This initiative demonstrated a commit- ment to diversity. However, in addition, this action was consistent with the organizations core mission, which is to ensure that more forms are filled in (Brockett, 2006).
WHAT I/O PSYCHOLOGY HAS DONE AND CAN DO FOR ORGANIZATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY RESEARCH AND PRACTICE
As noted earlier, the topic of organizational respon- sibility is not on the mainstream I/O psychology research agenda. However, a very positive sign is that the present chapter is included in this handbook. Possible reasons for the lack of attention to organiza- tional responsibility in the I/O psychology literature include a general sciencepractice gap in the field, and an emphasis on employees and internal organiza- tional processes usually at the individual level of analysis versus other external stakeholders, external processes, and organization-level phenomena. Nevertheless, I/O psychology has made important contributions to understanding certain aspects of organizational responsibility. As described in the pre- vious sections, several theories and bodies of research within the field of I/O psychology can inform the strategic responsibility management process (e.g., organizational change processes, measuring and rewarding organizational responsibility initiatives, communication processes). Moreover, although not labeled as such, several research domains in I/O psy- chology have an underlying organizational responsi- bility theme. Next, the chapter includes examples focusing on three specific topical areas: staffing decision making, training and development, and research ethics.
Selective Contributions of I/O Psychology to Organizational Responsibility Research and Practice As noted earlier, there is much I/O psychology research targeting the employee stakeholder group that is related to organizational responsibility. Consider the area of staffing decision making. The
Organizational Responsibility
871
11890-24_Ch24-rev3.qxd 5/3/10 10:06 AM Page 871
Co py
ri gh
t Am
er ic
an P sy
ch ol og ic al A ss oc ia ti on . No t fo r fu
rt he
r di
st ri
bu ti
on .
traditional approach to staffing decision making is to use a strict top-down procedure in which selec- tion is made according to who obtained the highest test score(s). However, those involved in staffing decision making are faced with a paradoxical situa- tion, because using general cognitive abilities and other valid predictors of job performance leads to adverse impact (Aguinis & Smith, 2007). Consequently, users of selection instruments are faced with what seems to be a catch-22: choosing to use general cognitive abilities tests and risk decreas- ing the diversity of an organizations workforce, or choosing to use predictors that will not diminish diversity but are not as valid as cognitive abilities tests. On the basis of this description, the situation seems the classical winlose scenario of pitting social versus economic performance in a mutually exclusive manner. Test-score banding was proposed as a method to solve this apparent dilemma (see Aguinis, 2004b, for a review). Banding is an alternative to the strict top-down selection strategy that often leads to adverse impact. Banding is based on the premise that an observed difference in the scores of two job appli- cants may be the result of measurement error instead of actual differences in the construct that is measured. Consequently, if it cannot be determined with a rea- sonable amount of certainty that two applicants differ on the construct underlying a predictor or criterion score, then there may be little reason to believe that they differ with respect to job performance. In other words, banding groups applicants who have indis- tinguishable scores. Consequently, job applicants who fall within the same band are considered equally qualified for the job in question. Therefore, choices can then be made among these equivalent appli- cants on the basis of criteria other than test scores, such as diversity considerations. The case of test- score banding, although not labeled as such in the I/O psychology literature, is a paradigmatic exam- ple of strategic responsibility management in which the organization considers both economic and social interests. The approach to hiring at the MGM Grand described earlier is consistent with this approach.
As a second example, consider the area of train- ing and development. Traditionally, the topic has been studied from the perspective of how to design
and deliver training programs that will maximize individual learning and the transfer of skills back on the job (Salas & Cannon-Bowers, 2001). However, a more recent perspective is that training and develop- ment efforts benefit individuals and organizations but also society at large (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009). As noted by Kaufman and Guerra (2001), we have entered a new era in which both achieving useful results and proving that they add value to the organi- zation and our shared society are required (p. 319). Most of the research on the relationship between training activities and their benefits for society has been conducted by economists, and the focal depen- dent variable is national economic performance. Aguinis and Kraiger (2009) reviewed this literature and concluded that training efforts produce improve- ments in the quality of the labor force, which in turn is one of the most important contributors to national economic growth. Economists coined the terms human capital and capital formation in people in referring mainly to schooling and on-the-job train- ing (Wang, Dou, & Li, 2002). In short, more recent approaches to studying training and development consider the impact of such efforts on individual learning and performance but also on society at large. The Microsoft case described earlier is consistent with this approach.
As a third illustration, consider the area of research ethics (Aguinis & Henle, 2002; Lefkowitz, 2003). Traditionally, the area of research ethics has had a focus on research participants only, which is consistent with the traditional I/O psychol- ogy approach of focusing on internal issues at the individual level of analysis. However, there seems to be a shift in emphasis toward the responsibility of the field in general. For example, Aguinis and Henle (2002) noted that we have the responsibility of guaranteeing that our research is based on sound ethical standards to protect the rights of research participants and the reputation of I/O psychology as a field (p. 34). Ethical considerations should play a role in designing a study, recruiting and selecting participants, executing the study, and reporting the results. If we do not conduct research that follows established ethical guidelines, partici- pants, organizations, and society will be wary of our work and may become alienated from the
Herman Aguinis
872
11890-24_Ch24-rev3.qxd 5/3/10 10:06 AM Page 872
Co py
ri gh
t Am
er ic
an P sy
ch ol og ic al A ss oc ia ti on . No t fo r fu
rt he
r di
st ri
bu ti
on .
discipline of I/O psychology (Aguinis & Henle, 2002, p. 52). Once again, in this area of research ethics, we see the need to consider the effect that our practices, in this case research practices, affect various stakeholders, including the field and society at large.
There are additional illustrations of indirect con- tributions of I/O psychology research to the organiza- tional responsibility literature. For example, I/O psychology research has investigated bias in pre- employment testing (e.g., Rotundo & Sackett, 1999). The ultimate goal of such body of research is to create decision-making systems that are free of bias, which certainly benefits job applicants, but is also beneficial in terms of racial harmony and societal stability. Also, there is an indirect contribution to the organizational responsibility literature on the part of research gener- ated in other applied psychology areas addressing issues such as environmentally friendly behaviors (e.g., Karpiak & Baril, 2008), prospective employees attractiveness to organizations (e.g., Turban & Greening, 1997), altruism (e.g., Mttus, Allik, Konstabel, Kangro, & Pullmann, 2008), and national culture (e.g., Gelade, Dobson, & Auer, 2008). Specifically, a better understanding of antecedents and consequents of environmentally friendly (e.g., recycling) and altruistic (e.g., citizenship) behaviors could shed light on environmentally friendly and altruistic actions and policies of organizations, a bet- ter understanding of what types of organizational responsibility actions and policies are perceived as most attractive by various stakeholders is likely to lead to a more qualified and larger pool of job appli- cants, and a better understanding of national culture could make a contribution to how overseas opera- tions of multinational corporations are able to earn goodwill for the country where the corporation is headquartered. This goodwill, in turn, can lead to better intercultural understanding and the reduc- tion of negative stereotypes and biases against other cultural or ethnic groups.
Thus, it seems that the topic of organizational responsibility is reflected in I/O psychology research and practice. However, these approaches are incipient and also do not seem to be mainstream. So, there is substantial room for both research and applications that link the traditional I/O psychology literature to
organizational responsibility. Looking toward the future, consider the following issues and questions:
The implementation of strategic responsibility management can benefit from research design, measurement, and data-analytic tools that are routinely reported in I/O psychology research (e.g., Aguinis, Pierce, Bosco, & Muslin, 2009; Rogelberg, 2002). For example, what are appro- priate procedures for data collection from vari- ous stakeholder groups? Can I/O psychology researchers and practitioners develop valid and standardized measures to assess the dimensions and indicators included in Table 24.1 and Ex- hibit 24.1? How can data from various stakehold- ers be combined or aggregated? What qualitative and quantitative research methods can be used separately or in combination to measure organi- zational responsibility processes and outcomes? What types of research design can be imple- mented to gather convincing evidence regarding the causal effects of organizational responsibility on various outcomes?
Like any other organizational change intervention, implementing strategic responsibility manage- ment must be accompanied with a change in per- formance measurement and the reward structure. There is an important I/O psychology literature on the design and implementation of performance management systems, and motivation theories, that can help with the implementation of organi- zational responsibility initiatives (Aguinis, 2009; see also Vol. 1, chap. 10, and Vol. 2, chap. 9, this handbook; chap. 13, this volume). For example, performance management systems that include the measurement of both behaviors and results (Aguinis, 2009) can be used to assess the relative effectiveness of organizational responsibility initiatives. As a second illustra- tion, reward systems that include long-term incentives for top management instead of only short-term incentives may be more likely to lead to better organizational responsibility ini- tiatives (Deckop, Merriman, & Gupta, 2006). In general, regarding implementation issues, the literature on organizational responsibility places more emphasis on the oughts than on the hows (Meehan et al., 2006). I/O psychology
Organizational Responsibility
873
11890-24_Ch24-rev3.qxd 5/3/10 10:06 AM Page 873
Co py
ri gh
t Am
er ic
an P sy
ch ol og ic al A ss oc ia ti on . No t fo r fu
rt he
r di
st ri
bu ti
on .
researchers and practitioners can help with implementation and execution issues.
Organizational responsibility is intrinsically a multilevel phenomenon. The measurement and reporting of organizational responsibility efforts can benefit from a vast I/O psychology literature on multilevel issues (e.g., Aguinis, Pierce, Bosco, & Muslin, 2009; Bliese, Chan, & Ployhart, 2007). Specifically, multilevel data-analytic techniques can be particularly useful for assessing the effects of organizational responsibility initiatives on indi- viduals, groups, organizations, and society in gen- eral, as well as for assessing potential same-level and cross-level moderating effects (cf. Aguinis, 2004a).
At present, only relatively few organizations actu- ally implement a test-score banding approach to decision making about staffing. Much research has addressed the impact of using banding on individ- ual performance. However, what is the impact of using banding in terms of social performance? Moreover, what is the impact of using banding on an organizations reputation, and to what extent can this affect an organizations economic perfor- mance (e.g., Aguinis & Harden, 2004)? In general and going beyond test-score banding specifically, I/O psychology can provide useful measurement and data-analysis tools to link economic, social, and environmental performance indicators (cf. Greenfield, 2004).
Issues such as commitment, engagement, dysfunc- tional and functional turnover, training, and employability are discussed in the organizational responsibility literature but are typically absent from balance sheets and corporate reports. I/O psychology can help make the business case for organizational responsibility by extrapolating, adapting, and using measurement and psycho- metric techniques developed in other areas (e.g., training evaluation: Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009; performance management: Aguinis, 2009).
Business schools are being criticized for not being responsible and are even blamed for training exec- utives deficiently. Moreover, this training defi- ciency is, to some extent, seen as the culprit for some of the recent corporate scandals (Bendell, 2007). Given the notable migration of large num-
bers of I/O psychologists to business schools (e.g., more editorial board members of Journal of Applied Psychology and Personnel Psychology are affiliated with business schools than with psychol- ogy departments; Cascio & Aguinis, 2008a), should I/O psychologists rethink our education and training programs so that organizational responsibility takes on a more prominent role?
As noted earlier, in addition to staffing decision making, training and development, and research ethics, there are several I/O psychology research domains that are related to organizational respon- sibility (i.e., environmentally friendly behaviors, altruism, and national culture). In addition, other topics include organizational restructuring, worklife balance, job design, and sexual harass- ment. How can I/O psychology research link these topics with the broader organizational responsibility literature? For example, I/O psycho- logy research has investigated implications of orga- nizational restructuring in terms of the individuals involved (i.e., those who are laid off and those who are not; e.g., Cascio, 1993). However, what are the implications of an organizational restructuring such as a reduction of 40% of the workforce in a manufacturing plant in terms of an organizations reputation and its standing in the eyes of the sur- rounding community? Similarly, I/O psychology research has investigated implications of sexual harassment for the harasser and the victim (e.g., Pierce & Aguinis, 2005). However, what are the implications of sexual harassment in terms of other stakeholders, such as suppliers and customers?
I/O psychology research tends to emphasize the individual level of analysis, and this type of approach can be beneficial for future research directions. For example, in terms of decision- making processes, are there individual-level vari- ables (e.g., attitudes, personality) that explain why some individuals and, in turn, organizations are more likely to engage in organization-level responsible initiatives compared with others (cf. Basu & Palazzo, 2008)? What is the role of cul- ture (both at the organizational and at the national level), and how does it affect approaches to orga- nizational responsibility (cf. Matten & Moon, 2008)? Related to these questions, what are some
Herman Aguinis
874
11890-24_Ch24-rev3.qxd 5/3/10 10:06 AM Page 874
Co py
ri gh
t Am
er ic
an P sy
ch ol og ic al A ss oc ia ti on . No t fo r fu
rt he
r di
st ri
bu ti
on .
of the underlying psychological processes that connect organizational responsibility initiatives with individual-level attitudes and behaviors (Aguilera, Rupp, Williams, & Ganapathi, 2007)? For example, what is the relationship between organizational responsibility and organizational attractiveness, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, citizenship behavior, and job per- formance (cf. Rupp, Ganapathi, Aguilera, & Williams, 2006)?
Can theories in I/O psychology such as the attractionselectionattrition model (Schneider, 1987) and personorganization fit (Edwards, Cable, Williamson, Lambert, & Shipp, 2006) explain the underlying psychological process through which some organizations may be more likely to engage in organizational responsibility initiatives over time compared with others? What is the relationship between organizational culture, organizational climate, and organizational responsibility (cf. Berson, Oreg, & Dvir, 2008)? How can organizations create cultures and cli- mates in which responsibility plays a central role?
The analysis of jobs and work has a long history in the field of I/O psychology (McCormick, Jeanneret, & Mecham, 1972). However, a search on the O*NET (http://online.onetcenter.org/) revealed that there is no information on occupa- tions related to organizational responsibility. Thus, future applied research can investigate what knowledge, skills, and abilities are required for organizational responsibility officers in vari- ous types of industries. Such work would also inform the field regarding the extent to which I/O psychology practitioners may be sufficiently equipped to occupy these positions.
CONCLUSION
Since its inception, the field of I/O psychology has walked a tightrope trying to maintain employee well-being while at the same time maximize organi- zational performance and profits. This dual role is reflected in the mission of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (2009) to enhance human well-being and performance in organizational and work settings. This dual role is a source of ten-
sion, as is reflected in the test-score banding literature (Aguinis, 2004b) and the staffing decision-making literature in general (e.g., Aguinis & Smith, 2007). However, this tension can be used as an opportunity for growth and increased impact and relevance of the field. Cascio and Aguinis (2008a) issued the warning that extrapolating past publication trends into the future suggests that
I/O psychology will not be out front in influencing the debate on issues that are (or will be) of broad organizational and societal appeal; it will not produce a sub- stantial body of research that will inform HR practitioners, senior managers, or outside stakeholders. (p. 1074)
Organizational responsibility is a concept consistent with the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychologys mission as well as the scientist practitioner model. However, there is still concern and skepticism on the part of some that organizational responsibility is more rhetoric and public relations than a reality. For example, Soares (2003) noted that in the game of corporations moral responsibility is a word without meaning (p. 143). I/O psychology researchers and practitioners can help address these concerns by designing and implementing strategic responsibility management systems that induce orga- nizations to act in responsible ways. I/O psychology researchers and practitioners can also help make the business case for strategic responsibility management and demonstrate that it is a winwin approach to management and not philanthropy that hurts the organizations real bottom line. Thus, OR provides a unique opportunity for I/O psychology researchers and practitioners to make contributions that are con- sistent with the fields mission and have the potential to elevate the field in the eyes of society at large.
References Aguilera, R. V., Rupp, D. E., Williams, C. A., &
Ganapathi, J. (2007). Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: A multi-level theory of social change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32, 836863.
Aguinis, H. (1993). Action research and scientific method: Presumed discrepancies and actual similarities. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 29, 416431.
Organizational Responsibility
875
11890-24_Ch24-rev3.qxd 5/3/10 10:06 AM Page 875
Co py
ri gh
t Am
er ic
an P sy
ch ol og ic al A ss oc ia ti on . No t fo r fu
rt he
r di
st ri
bu ti
on .
Aguinis, H. (2004a). Regression analysis for categorical moderators. New York: Guilford Press.
Aguinis, H. (Ed.). (2004b). Test-score banding in human resource selection: Legal, technical, and societal issues. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Aguinis, H. (2009). Performance management (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Aguinis, H., & Harden, E. (2004). Will banding benefit my organization? An application of multi-attribute utility analysis. In H. Aguinis (Ed.), Test-score banding in human resource selection: Legal, technical, and societal issues (pp. 193216). Westport, CT: Praeger.
Aguinis, H., & Henle, C. A. (2002). Ethics in research. In S. G. Rogelberg (Ed.), Handbook of research methods in industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 3456). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Aguinis, H., & Kraiger, K. (2009). Benefits of training and development for individuals and teams, organizations, and society. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 451474.
Aguinis, H., & Pierce, C. A. (2008). Enhancing the rele- vance of organizational behavior by embracing performance management research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29, 139145.
Aguinis, H., Pierce, C. A., Bosco, F. A., & Muslin, I. S. (2009). First decade of Organizational Research Methods: Trends in design, measurement, and data- analysis topics. Organizational Research Methods, 12, 69112.
Aguinis, H., & Smith, M. A. (2007). Understanding the impact of test validity and bias on selection errors and adverse impact in human resource selection. Personnel Psychology, 60, 165199.
Alexandrescu, F. (2007). [Review of the book Community rights and corporate responsibility: Canadian mining and oil companies in Latin America]. Critical Sociology, 33, 593595.
Amalric, F., & Hauser, J. (2005). Economic drivers of corporate responsibility activities. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 20 (Winter), 2738.
Amalric, F., Kennedy-Glans, D., Reddy, S., OSullivan, M., & Trevio, J. (2004). Introduction: Can CSR make a contribution to international solidarity and the quest for social justice in the South? Development, 47(3), 38.
Ambec, S., & Lanoie, P. (2008). Does it pay to be green? A systematic overview. Academy of Management Perspec- tives, 22(4), 4562.
An apology to Chiquita. (1998, June 28). Retrieved January 6, 2009, from http://www.enquirer.com/editions/ 1998/06/28/loc_chiquita28.html
Andrews, K. R. (1973). Can the best corporations be made moral? Harvard Business Review, 51(3), 5764.
Bansal, P., & Roth, K. (2000). Why companies go green: A model of ecological responsiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 717747.
Baritz, L. (1960). The servants of power. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.
Barnett, M. L. (2007). Stakeholder influence capacity and the variability off financial returns to corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32, 794816.
Basu, K., & Palazzo, G. (2008). Corporate social respon- sibility: A process model of sensemaking. Academy of Management Review, 33, 122136.
Baue, W. (2004). Rating corporate sustainability: Behind the scenes at Oekom Research. Retrieved January 6, 2009, from http://www.socialfunds.com/news/article. cgi/1575.html
Bendell, J. (2007). World review: The responsibility of business schools. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 28 ( JulySeptember), 414.
Berson, Y., Oreg, S., & Dvir, T. (2008). CEO values, orga- nizational culture and firm outcomes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29, 615633.
Bhimani, A., & Soonawalla, K. (2005). From confor- mance to performance: The corporate responsibilities continuum. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 24, 165174.
Bliese, P. D., Chan, D., & Ployhart, R. E. (2007). Multilevel methods: Future directions in measurement, longitu- dinal analysis, and nonnormal outcomes. Organiza- tional Research Methods, 10, 551563.
Bonfiglioni, E., Moir, L., & Ambrosini, V. (2006). Develop- ing the wider role of business in society: The expe- rience of Microsoft in developing training and supporting employability. Corporate Governance, 6, 401408.
Bowen, H. R. (1953). Social responsibilities of the business- man. New York: Harper & Row.
Brockett, J. (2006, June 15). HM Revenue & Customs shows CSR doesnt need to be taxing. People Management, 12(12), 12.
Buehler, V. M., & Shetty, Y. K. (1976). Managerial response to social responsibility challenge. Academy of Management Journal, 19, 6678.
Burchell, J., & Cook, J. (2006). Its good to talk? Examining attitudes towards corporate social respon- sibility dialogue and engagement processes. Business Ethics: A European Review, 15, 154170.
Capriotti, P., & Moreno, A. (2007). Communicating cor- porate responsibility through corporate Web sites in Spain. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 12, 221237.
Carroll, A. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 4, 497505.
Carroll, A. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business & Society, 38, 268295.
Herman Aguinis
876
11890-24_Ch24-rev3.qxd 5/3/10 10:06 AM Page 876
Co py
ri gh
t Am
er ic
an P sy
ch ol og ic al A ss oc ia ti on . No t fo r fu
rt he
r di
st ri
bu ti
on .
Cascio, W. F. (1993). Downsizing: What do we know? What have we learned? Academy of Management Executive, 7(1), 95104.
Cascio, W. F., & Aguinis, H. (2008a). Research in indus- trial and organizational psychology from 1963 to 2007: Changes, choices, and trends. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 10621081.
Cascio, W. F, & Aguinis, H. (2008b). Staffing twenty-first- century organizations. Academy of Management Annals, 2, 133165.
Cochran, P. L. (2007). The evolution of corporate social responsibility. Business Horizons, 50, 449454.
Corporate responsibility. (2006). Retrieved January 7, 2009, from http://www.chiquita.com/Corporate Commitment/CRReports.aspx
Corporate social responsibility. (2009). Retrieved January 7, 2009, from http://www1.orange.ch/residential_ about-orange.html#corporate-social-responsibility
Dalton, D. R., Hitt, M. A., Certo, S. T., & Dalton, C. M. (2007). The fundamental agency problem and its mit- igation: Independence, equity, and the market for corporate control. Academy of Management Annals, 1, 164.
Davis, P. (2004). Making responsibility relevant. Strategic Communication Management, 8(1), 67.
Deckop, J. R., Merriman, K. K., & Gupta, S. (2006). The effects of CEO pay structure on corporate social per- formance. Journal of Management, 32, 329342.
Dumas, L. J. (2007). Taking the profit out of war. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 13, 383385.
Edwards, J. R., Cable, D. M., Williamson, I. O., Lambert, L. S., & Shipp, A. J. (2006). The phenomenology of fit: Linking the person and environment to the subjec- tive experience of person-environment fit. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 802827.
Elkington, J. (1998). Cannibals with forks: The triple bot- tom line of 21st century business. Gabriola Island, British Columbia, Canada: New Society Publishers.
Enderle, G. (2004). Global competition and corporate responsibilities of small and medium-sized enterprises. Business Ethics: A European Review, 13(1), 5163.
Fortanier, F., & Kolk, A. (2007). On the economic dimen- sions of corporate social responsibility: Exploring Fortune Global 250 reports. Business & Society, 46, 457478.
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stake- holder approach. Boston: Pitman.
Friedman, M. (1993). The social responsibility of busi- ness is to increase its profits. In G. D. Chryssides & J. H. Kaler (Eds.), An introduction to business ethics (pp. 249254). London: Thomson Business Press.
Friedman, S. L. (2003, May 16). Corporate Americas social conscience. Fortune. Retrieved January 6, 2009, from
http://www.timeinc.net/fortune/services/sections/ fortune/corp/2003_05csr.html
Gelade, G. A., Dobson, P., & Auer, K. (2008). Individua- lism, masculinity, and the sources of organizational commitment. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 39, 599617.
The global economic downturn: Why the UN Global Compact and corporate sustainability are needed more than ever. (2008). Retrieved January 6, 2009, from http://www. unglobalcompact.org/NewsAndEvents/news_archives/ 2008_10_17.html
Greenfield, W. M. (2004). In the name of corporate social responsibility. Business Horizons, 47(1), 1928.
Greenwood, M. (2007). Stakeholder engagement: Beyond the myth of corporate responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 74, 315327.
Guion, R. M. (1965). Industrial psychology as an acade- mic discipline. American Psychologist, 20, 815621.
Haigh, M., & Jones, M. T. (2007). A critical review of relations between corporate responsibility research and practice. Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies, 12(1), 1628.
Henriques, A., & Richards, J. (2004). The triple bottom line: Does it all add up? London: Earthscan Publications Ltd.
Hersey, R. B. (1932). Workers emotions in shop and home. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Hillenbrand, C., & Money, K. (2007). Corporate respon- sibility and corporate reputation: Two separate con- cepts or two sides of the same coin? Corporate Reputation Review, 10, 261277.
Hillman, A. J., & Keim, G. D. (2001). Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues: Whats the bottom line? Strategic Management Journal, 22, 125139.
Hoffmann, J., Scherhorn, G., & Dpfner, C. (Eds.). (2000). Intercultural comparability of the ethical assessment of enterprises according to criteria of cultural, social and environmental responsibility. Munich, Germany: Oekom Verlag.
Holcomb, J. L., Upchurch, R. S., & Okumus, F. (2007). Corporate social responsibility: What are top hotel companies reporting? International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 19, 461475.
Hollender, J. (2004). What matters most: Corporate values and social responsibility. California Management Review, 46(4), 111119.
Hyatt, J. (2008). Corporate responsibility and the financial crisis: Future of company citizenship and governance efforts takes shape in tumultuous times. Retrieved January 6, 2009, from http://www.thecro.com/ node/762
Organizational Responsibility
877
11890-24_Ch24-rev3.qxd 5/3/10 10:06 AM Page 877
Co py
ri gh
t Am
er ic
an P sy
ch ol og ic al A ss oc ia ti on . No t fo r fu
rt he
r di
st ri
bu ti
on .
Jensen, M. C. (2001). Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 14, 821.
Johnson, R., & Greening, D. (1999). The effects of corpo- rate governance and institutional ownership types on corporate social performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 564578.
Jones, T., Fried, B., & Nazarechuk, A. (1994). Corporate responsibility on a grand scale: MGMs employment outreach program. FIU Hospitality Review, 12(2), 112.
Jones, T. M. (1991). Ethical decision making by individu- als in organizations: An issue-contingent model. Academy of Management Review, 16, 366395.
Karpiak, C., & Baril, G. L. (2008). Moral reasoning and concern for the environment. Journal of Environ- mental Psychology, 28, 203208.
Kaufman, R., & Guerra, I. (2001). A perspective adjust- ment to add value to external clients (including society). Human Resource Development Quarterly, 12, 319324.
Key figures. (2009). Retrieved January 7, 2009, from http://www1.orange.ch/residential_about-orange. html#key-figures
Konczak, L. J. (2005). Review of management: Inventing and delivering its future. Personnel Psychology, 58, 217220.
Kotler, P., & Lee, N. (Eds.). (2005). Corporate social responsibility: Doing the most good for your company and your cause. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Kravitz, D. A., Harrison, D. A., Turner, M. E., Levine, E. E., Chaves, W., Brannick, M. T., et al. (1997). Affirmative action: A review of psychological and behavioral research. Bowling Green, OH: Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology.
Lefkowitz, J. (2003). Ethics and values in industrial- organizational psychology. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Leisinger, K. M. (2007). Capitalism with a human face. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 28, 113132.
Mackey, A., Mackey, T. B., & Barney, J. B. (2007). Corporate social responsibility and firm perfor- mance: Investor preferences and corporate strategies. Academy of Management Review, 32, 817835.
Mahoney, L. S., & Thorne, L. (2005). Corporate social responsibility and long-term compensation: Evidence from Canada. Journal of Business Ethics, 57, 241253.
Marshall, J., & Heffes, E. (2007, January/February). New group pushes responsibility officer. Financial Executive, 23(1), 11.
Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (2008). Early predictors of job burnout and engagement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 498512.
Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). Implicit and explicit CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative
understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33, 404424.
McCormick, E. J., Jeanneret, P. R., & Mecham, R. C. (1972). A study of job characteristics and job dimen- sions as based on the Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) [Monograph]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 56, 347368.
Meehan, J., Meehan, K., & Richards, A. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: The 3C-SR model. International Journal of Social Economics, 33, 386398.
Middlemiss, N. (2003). Authentic not cosmetic: CSR as brand enhancement. Brand Management, 10, 353361.
Mirvis, P. (2008). Executive development through consciousness-raising experiences. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 7, 173188.
Moir, L. (2007, Autumn). Measuring the business bene- fits of corporate responsibility. Management Services, 51(3), 4647.
Moir, L., Kennerley, M., & Ferguson, D. (2007). Measuring the business case: Linking stakeholder and shareholder value. Corporate Governance, 7, 388400.
Molteni, M. (2006). The social-competitive innovation pyramid. Corporate Governance, 6, 516526.
Mttus, R., Allik, J., Konstabel, K., Kangro, E., & Pullmann, H. (2008). Beliefs about the relationships between personality and intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 457462.
Mueller, B. (2007). Just where does corporate responsibil- ity end and consumer responsibility begin? The case of marketing food to kids around the globe. International Journal of Advertising, 26, 561564.
Murphy, K. R., & Saal, F. E. (1990). What should we expect from scientist-practitioners? In K. R. Murphy & F. E. Saal (Eds.), Psychology in organizations: Integrating science and practice (pp. 4966). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Natures way to beautiful: The Body Shop believes that there is only one way to beautifulNatures way. (2009). Retrieved January 8, 2009, from http://www.thebody shop-usa.com/bodyshop/beauty/about-us
Orange Communications Switzerland. (2002). Respon- sibility 2002. Lausanne, Switzerland: Orange Com- munications. Retrieved January 6, 2009, from http:// img.orange.ch/static/Content/documents/General/ AboutUs/CorporateAffairs/csr_report_en.pdf
Orlitzky, M. (2001). Does firm size confound the rela- tionship between corporate social performance and firm financial performance? Journal of Business Ethics, 33, 167180.
Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta- analysis. Organization Studies, 24, 403441.
Herman Aguinis
878
11890-24_Ch24-rev3.qxd 5/3/10 10:06 AM Page 878
Co py
ri gh
t Am
er ic
an P sy
ch ol og ic al A ss oc ia ti on . No t fo r fu
rt he
r di
st ri
bu ti
on .
Overview of the UN Global Compact. (2009). Retrieved January 6, 2009, from http://www.unglobalcompact. org/AboutTheGC/index.html
Pierce, C. A., & Aguinis, H. (2005). Legal standards, ethi- cal standards, and responses to social-sexual conduct at work. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 727732.
Pierce, C. A., & Aguinis, H. (in press). Moving beyond a legal-centric approach to managing workplace romances: Organizationally sensible recommenda- tions for HR leaders. Human Resource Management.
Responsible Endowment Coalition. (2009). Retrieved January 6, 2009, from http://www.endowmentethics. org/
Rogelberg, S. G. (Ed.). (2002). Handbook of research meth- ods in industrial and organizational psychology. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Rotundo, M., & Sackett, P. R. (1999). Effect of rater race on conclusions regarding differential prediction in cognitive ability tests. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 815822.
Rupp, D. E., Ganapathi, J., Aguilera, R. V., & Williams, C. A. (2006). Employee reactions to corporate social responsibility: An organizational justice framework. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 537543.
Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (2001). The science of training: A decade of progress. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 471499.
Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, 40, 437453.
Simms, J. (2002). Business: Corporate social responsibilityYou know it makes sense. Accountancy, 130(1311), 4850.
Simon, J. G., Powers, C. W., & Gunnemann, J. P. (1972). The ethical investor: Universities and corporate respon- sibility. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Soares, C. (2003). Corporate versus individual moral responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 46, 143150.
Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. (2009). Mission statement. Retrieved January 8, 2009, from http://www.siop.org/siophoshin.aspx
The Body Shop: Company profile. (2009). Retrieved January 9, 2009, from http://www.thebodyshop.co. uk/_en/_gb/services/aboutus_company.aspx
Turban, D. B., & Greening, D. W. (1997). Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 658672.
United Nations Global Compact. (2008). United Nations Global Compact. Retrieved January 7, 2009, from http://www.unglobalcompact.org/
van Tulder, R., & van der Zwart, A. (2006). International business-society management: Linking corporate responsibility and globalization. London: Routledge.
Varley, P. (Ed.). (1998). The sweatshop quandary: Corporate responsibility on the global frontier. Washington, DC: Investor Responsibility Research Center.
Verschoor, C. C. (2003). Corporate responsibility: High priority for CEOs. Strategic Finance, 85(4), 20, 22.
Vogel, D. J. (2005a). Is there a market for virtue? The business case for corporate social responsibility. California Management Review, 47(4), 1945.
Vogel, D. J. (2005b). The market for virtue: The potential and limits of corporate social responsibility. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Waddock, S. A. (2004). Parallel universes: Companies, academics, and the progress of corporate citizenship. Business and Society Review, 109, 542.
Waddock, S., & Bodwell, C. (2004). Managing responsi- bility: What can be learned from the quality move- ment? California Management Review, 47(1), 2537.
Waddock, S. A., Bodwell, C., & Graves, S. B. (2000). Responsibility: The new business imperative. Academy of Management Executive, 16(2), 132148.
Wang, G. G., Dou, Z., & Li, N. (2002). A systems approach to measuring return on investment for HRD inter- ventions. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 13, 203224.
Werre, M. (2003). Implementing corporate responsibil- ity: The Chiquita case. Journal of Business Ethics, 44, 247260.
Wood, D. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16, 691718.
Yan, J. (2003). Corporate responsibility and the brands of tomorrow. Brand Management, 10, 290302.
Zedeck, S., & Goldstein, I. L. (2000). The relationship between I/O psychology and public policy: A commen- tary. In J. F. Kehoe (Ed.), Managing selection in chang- ing organizations (pp. 371396). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Organizational Responsibility
879
11890-24_Ch24-rev3.qxd 5/3/10 10:06 AM Page 879
Co py
ri gh
t Am
er ic
an P sy
ch ol og ic al A ss oc ia ti on . No t fo r fu
rt he
r di
st ri
bu ti
on .
Are you busy and do not have time to handle your assignment? Are you scared that your paper will not make the grade? Do you have responsibilities that may hinder you from turning in your assignment on time? Are you tired and can barely handle your assignment? Are your grades inconsistent?
Whichever your reason is, it is valid! You can get professional academic help from our service at affordable rates. We have a team of professional academic writers who can handle all your assignments.
Students barely have time to read. We got you! Have your literature essay or book review written without having the hassle of reading the book. You can get your literature paper custom-written for you by our literature specialists.
Do you struggle with finance? No need to torture yourself if finance is not your cup of tea. You can order your finance paper from our academic writing service and get 100% original work from competent finance experts.
Computer science is a tough subject. Fortunately, our computer science experts are up to the match. No need to stress and have sleepless nights. Our academic writers will tackle all your computer science assignments and deliver them on time. Let us handle all your python, java, ruby, JavaScript, php , C+ assignments!
While psychology may be an interesting subject, you may lack sufficient time to handle your assignments. Don’t despair; by using our academic writing service, you can be assured of perfect grades. Moreover, your grades will be consistent.
Engineering is quite a demanding subject. Students face a lot of pressure and barely have enough time to do what they love to do. Our academic writing service got you covered! Our engineering specialists follow the paper instructions and ensure timely delivery of the paper.
In the nursing course, you may have difficulties with literature reviews, annotated bibliographies, critical essays, and other assignments. Our nursing assignment writers will offer you professional nursing paper help at low prices.
Truth be told, sociology papers can be quite exhausting. Our academic writing service relieves you of fatigue, pressure, and stress. You can relax and have peace of mind as our academic writers handle your sociology assignment.
We take pride in having some of the best business writers in the industry. Our business writers have a lot of experience in the field. They are reliable, and you can be assured of a high-grade paper. They are able to handle business papers of any subject, length, deadline, and difficulty!
We boast of having some of the most experienced statistics experts in the industry. Our statistics experts have diverse skills, expertise, and knowledge to handle any kind of assignment. They have access to all kinds of software to get your assignment done.
Writing a law essay may prove to be an insurmountable obstacle, especially when you need to know the peculiarities of the legislative framework. Take advantage of our top-notch law specialists and get superb grades and 100% satisfaction.
We have highlighted some of the most popular subjects we handle above. Those are just a tip of the iceberg. We deal in all academic disciplines since our writers are as diverse. They have been drawn from across all disciplines, and orders are assigned to those writers believed to be the best in the field. In a nutshell, there is no task we cannot handle; all you need to do is place your order with us. As long as your instructions are clear, just trust we shall deliver irrespective of the discipline.
Our essay writers are graduates with bachelor's, masters, Ph.D., and doctorate degrees in various subjects. The minimum requirement to be an essay writer with our essay writing service is to have a college degree. All our academic writers have a minimum of two years of academic writing. We have a stringent recruitment process to ensure that we get only the most competent essay writers in the industry. We also ensure that the writers are handsomely compensated for their value. The majority of our writers are native English speakers. As such, the fluency of language and grammar is impeccable.
There is a very low likelihood that you won’t like the paper.
Not at all. All papers are written from scratch. There is no way your tutor or instructor will realize that you did not write the paper yourself. In fact, we recommend using our assignment help services for consistent results.
We check all papers for plagiarism before we submit them. We use powerful plagiarism checking software such as SafeAssign, LopesWrite, and Turnitin. We also upload the plagiarism report so that you can review it. We understand that plagiarism is academic suicide. We would not take the risk of submitting plagiarized work and jeopardize your academic journey. Furthermore, we do not sell or use prewritten papers, and each paper is written from scratch.
You determine when you get the paper by setting the deadline when placing the order. All papers are delivered within the deadline. We are well aware that we operate in a time-sensitive industry. As such, we have laid out strategies to ensure that the client receives the paper on time and they never miss the deadline. We understand that papers that are submitted late have some points deducted. We do not want you to miss any points due to late submission. We work on beating deadlines by huge margins in order to ensure that you have ample time to review the paper before you submit it.
We have a privacy and confidentiality policy that guides our work. We NEVER share any customer information with third parties. Noone will ever know that you used our assignment help services. It’s only between you and us. We are bound by our policies to protect the customer’s identity and information. All your information, such as your names, phone number, email, order information, and so on, are protected. We have robust security systems that ensure that your data is protected. Hacking our systems is close to impossible, and it has never happened.
You fill all the paper instructions in the order form. Make sure you include all the helpful materials so that our academic writers can deliver the perfect paper. It will also help to eliminate unnecessary revisions.
Proceed to pay for the paper so that it can be assigned to one of our expert academic writers. The paper subject is matched with the writer’s area of specialization.
You communicate with the writer and know about the progress of the paper. The client can ask the writer for drafts of the paper. The client can upload extra material and include additional instructions from the lecturer. Receive a paper.
The paper is sent to your email and uploaded to your personal account. You also get a plagiarism report attached to your paper.
GET A PERFECT SCORE!!! 
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.
Read moreEach paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.
Read moreThanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.
Read moreYour email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.
Read moreBy sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.
Read more