Generación del residuo

68

Corporate Sustainability,

69

described in the academic literature as synonymous with goodwill, image creation and organisational standard (Esen, 2015; Baah et al, 2020). Corporate competitiveness is an added value based on some elements in different frameworks and proposed models of CSR such as standard of measuring performance like growth, earnings and profitability rates, products and service quality standards which meets and exceed stakeholders expectations, efficient utilisation of resources in production process, innovating new techniques of production and decision making process (Vilanova et al, 2009).

Corporate Sustainability

Corporate sustainability is becoming a household word commonly used in management field to represent all efforts geared towards maintaining corporate performance in different forms in a most effective and efficient way to attain organisational objectives. The transformation of CSR from philanthropic concept to a genuine source of strategy is an evidence of integrating corporate sustainability with CSR practice. There is an increase in interest in different aspects of CSR but the type of prioritisation which corporate sustainability receives is quite overwhelming due to the ability of the concept to integrate environmental management, profitability, ethical practices, abiding by regulations and providing social welfare to the community with long term achievement of organisational objectives.

Environmental management seems to be the first element to shape how corporate sustainability is defined then corporate citizenry, corporate performance and globalization to a certain extent. Sustainability therefore implies that business organisations and the society in general must not depend and continue using resources that are non-renewables. Sustainability standards or measurement depends on the rate at which organisations use resources in relation to the rate at which resources could be replaced or regenerated (Danso et al, 2020).

Organisational operations or productions that are unsustainable can only be tolerated before coming up with an appropriate sustainability plan or anticipating a future phasing out of a particular resource in the production process. Sustainability is achieved by enhancing efficient ways of employing resources to achieve organisational objectives like introducing an energy efficiency program to reduce cost and comply with the going green advantage. In environmental management there is a need to understand the term industrial consumption which refers to the utilisation of natural capital to produce goods and services, if in this process the rate at which resources are used cannot be replenished or the rate of pollution created by the production process cannot be controlled hence the industry or corporate body is unsustainable because of ecological inefficiency (Mojtahidi & Lan, 2017). Sustainable companies are the ones that do not cause degradation of the environment and they only consume or utilise natural resources at rates lower than what the environment can naturally replenish (Ayres, 1989).

Corporate performance is measured in terms of profits and the social welfare an organisation provides to the community at large. Good corporate performance is mainly concerned with the management function that ensures proper decisions are made regarding sustainability by making resource utilisation options which consider future constraints in availability and economic viability. Corporate performance is therefore concerned with the management of resources in the present so that it will be viable in achieving objectives in the future.

Corporate performance is gauged by the rate at which all forms of economic capital (tangible and intangible) are effectively used to meet consistently beyond stakeholders expectations.

This means there must be innovative ways of meeting stakeholders‟ needs and expectations in order to be sustainable (Theodoulidis et al, 2017).

70

Stakeholder relationship management is the process of coordinating and facilitating the participation of managers and stakeholders in decision making process of the organisation with a view of meeting stakeholders‟ expectations (Vuong et al, 2020). Sustaining cooperation with different set of stakeholders and understanding socio-economic priorities of the community provide the basis for having a sustainable relationship with stakeholders.

Management of relationship with stakeholders is about developing and sustaining relationship between the firm and its stakeholders (Greenwood, 2007) Managers are expected to focus on engaging stakeholders by adopting the following approaches; effective communication methods, compatibility between organisational decisions and stakeholder expectations and lastly engaging the stakeholders with urgent claims that are legitimate before the dormant ones (Mitchell et al, 1997; Danso et al, 2020). The figure below illustrates the three dimensions of corporate sustainability.

Fig 1- Dimensions of Corporate Sustainability

Corporate Reputation

Corporate reputation is the basis or determinant factor for stakeholders‟ decision making, customers give more loyalty and make decisions to buy products based on corporate image and reputation, employees prefer to offer their services to organizations that are reputable and investors choose to invest in companies that are reputable. All sets of stakeholders internal and external prefer dealing with organisations that are more focused on corporate reputation or image creation (Maden et al, 2012). Different terms or expressions are used to represent corporate reputation, they include; goodwill, corporate image, corporate identity, brand, and organisational standing (Wartick, 2002).

In a nutshell, corporate reputation is determined by the management efforts in combining corporate image and organisational objectives. Corporate reputation is an asset that reflects the strength or weakness of corporate decisions and actions to satisfy stakeholder‟s needs and extend beyond their expectations, therefore it is an emotional capital measured by the summation of satisfaction levels ascribed to different stakeholders. Reputation is created and enhanced by balancing both internal and external stakeholder expectations with

Corporate Sustainability

Environmental Management Natural Capital, Eco-efficiency in resource utilisation

Stakeholder relationship management Social Capital, Communication,

Organisation & Stakeholder expectations, Stakeholder Salience

Corporate Performance Economic Capital, Production &

Distribution, Innovation

71

organisational actions. Factors that affect corporate reputation of an organisation include;

structure of ownership, corporate performance both previous and present, adherence to regulations, level of advertising, culture, competitive strategy and size of the firm (Carmeli, 2004; Esen, 2015). Corporate reputation is a concept that is measurable by a scale of reputational quotient based on a model of drivers to corporate reputation. The drivers serve as the yardstick for the measurement which includes; working condition/environment, corporate social responsibility, corporate financial performance, visionary leadership, products and services and stakeholders emotional appeal (Fombrun et al, 2000). Another way of measuring corporate reputation advocated by fortune magazine in a survey conducted on American firms is a combination of these attributes; ability to attract, recruit and train skilled workforce, quality of management, protection of environment and offering community development services, improvement on product and service quality, good financial performance, innovative management, competitiveness, efficient use of resources, long term valuable investments (Fryxell & Wang, 1994). Similarly, a corporate reputation measurement based on the views of employees and customers consist of six items; job satisfaction, employee communication channels and methods, culture, perceived esteem/prestige, goals and values, lastly, organisational identification (Davies et al, 2004). In all measurement scales of corporate reputation what seems to be common among them are the major components like;

products and service quality, leadership, environmental management, financial performance, working conditions and CSR initiatives (Esen, 2015; Lewis, 2003). Many scholars express that corporate reputation is determined by perception of stakeholders on CSR activities.

Organisations that engage in CSR are perceived to possess good corporate values and are more likely to get more loyalty from customers. CSR is used as a strategic tool in meeting stakeholder‟s expectations and building corporate image (Lai et al, 2010). Companies that are struggling with the effects of bad reputation are showing interest in CSR engagement to revive and boost their corporate reputation because it has become an important driver of stakeholders view and corporate reputation (Jared et al, 2020; Yoon et al, 2006).

Organisations that engage in CSR are expected to imbibe good practices and avoid harmful practices because these two set of actions has impact on corporate reputation. CSR is instrumentally used as a strategy to enhance corporate reputation because stakeholders are more conscious with safety of products than its availability (Page & Fearn, 2005). The significance of CSR initiatives for corporate bodies is positively related with corporate performance, stakeholder‟s satisfaction, corporate strategies and most importantly corporate reputation. Organisations realize the instrumental nature of corporate reputation and how it reflects on the attainment of business objectives especially satisfaction of stakeholder need like employees and shareholders are prioritising it as part of corporate strategy. Reputation of a business organisation shows how it reacts in different situations and the general perceptions of all sets of stakeholders on how the business organisation is operating. The relationship between CSR and corporate performance is influenced by corporate reputation it can effectively moderate the relationship between these two variables. The diagram below illustrates factors surrounding the concept of corporate reputation.

72

Fig 2 – Factors in Corporate reputation

Corporate Competitiveness

Competitiveness of an organisation refers to the ability and flexibility of responding to prevalent conditions of a market with a conscious desire to withstand and perform better than others hence there is a need for strategy and innovation to achieve this goal. Due to the multidimensional nature of approaches in corporate competitiveness there must be a consideration of organisational capabilities in adapting new techniques of production and flexibility in changing marketing strategies. Competitiveness is more diverse and not restricted to production process alone but the flexibility and ability to introduce marketing strategies that are more efficient and sound enough to withstand current market trends.

Corporate competitiveness is based on some main dimensions in different frameworks and proposed models of corporate social responsibility, they are; Standard of measuring performance like growth, earnings and profitability rates, products and service quality standards which meets and exceed stakeholders expectations, efficient utilisation of resources in production process (i.e to achieve sustainability), innovating new techniques of production and decision making process, and finally image creation by maintaining a distinctive corporate brand and enhancing trust between the business and its stakeholders (Vilanova et al, 2009). Scholars of CSR describe corporate competitiveness in terms of four factors: the capacity to innovate, stakeholder relationship management, reputation and valuable resources both human and material. In this context, the framework used for corporate competitiveness has been expanded to include both human and material resources that provide favorable conditions for increased corporate competitiveness of the organisation (Kay, 1993).

Therefore, corporate competitiveness justifies the need for an advanced and robust

Predictors – CSR initiatives

Environmental Management Working Conditions

Products & Services Visionary Leadership Stakeholder expectations

Outcomes – Goodwill

Customer Loyalty

Corporate Image & Identity Organisational Standing Balancing expectations &

Organisational actions

Moderators –

Ownership Structure Firm Size

Corporate performance Regulatory adherence Advertising Level Religion/Cultural Values Competition Strategy

73

organisation capabilities like adaptability, flexibility, quality management, and marketing strategies (Barney, 1991). Competitiveness is not solely based on productivity but depends rather on the ability of the organisation to innovate, produce and market products that are safer and more qualitative than ones produced by others at a more convenient price to get more customer loyalty.

Previous studies has shown that the link between CSR and corporate competitiveness is subject to the moderating effect of reputation and image creation serving as a variable that can drive the introduction, development and integration of corporate strategy in a business (Haigh & Jones, 2006). The relationship between CSR and corporate competitiveness moderated by reputation take place in three processes; stakeholder relationship management, corporate strategy and accountability. In other words, corporate strategy affects image and reputation which in turn positively affects rate of competitiveness an organisation is trying to gain from. Reputation also affects the level of comprehension attached to the diversity within the competitive environment coupled with enhancing stakeholder relationship management by transparency and accountability. Relationship between CSR and firm performance is more complicated than previously thought as later studies reveal more divergent views on this relationship, some are showing positive while others are negative or showing no correlation.

Nevertheless, by introducing variables that predict the outcomes of organisational performance more precisely the result tends to show a positive relationship, this could be an interpretation to the reason why different variations were observed previously. Studies that undertake the extension of relationship between CSR and firm performance through the mediating variables like stakeholder satisfaction, corporate reputation and corporate competitiveness show convincing positive effects the three aforementioned variables are having on CSR and firm performance relationship (Saeidi et al, 2015). This shows that the intervening and linking effects performed by introduced variables are the underlying cause of different results in studies on CSR and corporate performance.

Relationship between corporate sustainability, reputation, competitiveness and CSR Achieving sustainability is a strategic goal of all corporate organisations which needs environmental management, increasing corporate performance both social and financial then improving relationship with stakeholders. CSR in its strategic stage goes beyond philanthropy and extends to issues like; internationalisation of standards, Institutionalisation of CSR responsibilities especially legal and ethical dimensions, corporate sustainability and corporate strategy. Ethical and legal dimensions of CSR are more attuned with sustainability practice in environmental protection, maintaining good relationship with stakeholders. Imbibing ethical practices means a corporate body must have a code of conduct that supports what consumers and all other stakeholders consider ethical in order to get more loyalty and legitimacy.

Consumers tend to prefer patronizing products from organisations that prioritize ethical conducts in their operations and this concept is known as ethical consumerism. Since corporate performance depends on promoting economic responsibilities, philanthropy or altruism can offer more chances of achieving maximasation of shareholders wealth and increase in production capacity. The organisation is expected to focus on environmental protection initiatives if needed by the general public and use it for achieving strategic goals in the long term. The government as a stakeholder can regulate CSR practices making it mandatory for organisations to actively participate in environmental protection activities instead of providing social welfare programmes to the community, therefore prioritising environmental management as part of attaining corporate sustainability is related with legal responsibility. Stakeholders who are internal like employees are more interested in getting improvement on working conditions, allowances, and all other forms of motivations. Debtors

74

and creditors are interested in getting all contractual obligations fulfilled, customers are more concerned with safety and availability of products at affordable rates, managers are expected to strike a balance between all stakeholders needs and what the organisation can offer and this needs evaluating the legitimacy of claims by stakeholders, its urgency and the power to influence decisions a stakeholder possess, these are part of the steps in effective stakeholder management and engagement. Because of the strategic nature of the term CSR it is at times defined as an instrumental way of allocating organisational resources which is often discretionary in nature to enhance relationship with key stakeholders (Barnett, 2007).

Attainment of corporate sustainability means the fulfillment of CSR activities that are attached to environmental management, corporate performance and stakeholder management.

Different empirical and conceptual studies in CSR show an enhancing relationship between corporate reputation and CSR, the higher an organisation contributes towards improvement of social welfare, the higher its reputation will be (Fombrun & Shanley, 1990). The need to improve on corporate reputation serves as a driver towards engaging in CSR initiatives, hence reputation increases when more CSR activities are introduced. Increase in corporate reputation is positively related with engagement in CSR activities. In other words, increase in corporate reputation is regarded as the most vital outcome of corporate social responsibility (Garbeg & Fombrun, 2006). Engagement in CSR activities has a direct positive effect on corporate reputation depending on the type of activity initiated and the type of stakeholders targeted with that set of CSR activities (Brammer & Pavelin, 2006). Similarly, in relation to the instrumental application of CSR, there is a relationship between CSR and corporate reputation even in developing countries where disclosure of CSR activities to external stakeholders is low due to less regulatory requirements and lack of effective communication medium or competent staffs to handle CSR disclosure (Rettab et al, 2009). The major determinant that connects between CSR and corporate competitiveness is corporate performance both social and financial, because corporate competitiveness is defined by market trends driven by firm interactions and level of customer satisfaction. This finally culminates with increase in CSR to get shareholder wealth maximasation and fulfillment of all stakeholder expectations. The underlying statement is that the connection between CSR and competitiveness is not in a single way but must touch on how market situation affects implementation of CSR (Porter et al, 2006). Similarly, corporate competitiveness and CSR are related in the tendency for the two variables if properly connected yields integration of CSR policies in business management process and innovating CSR practices that are more effective in achieving all business objectives. The diagram below illustrates the interrelationship between the three variables; corporate sustainability, corporate reputation and corporate competitiveness.

75

Fig 3 – Interrelationship between CS, CR, CC and CSR

Conclusion

In showing the interconnectedness between the three major factors discussed in CSR, the issue of stakeholder relationship management, alignment with cultural values/religious influences of the community, corporate financial performance and innovation techniques in production and decision making are the source of link between the three. Stakeholder satisfaction and relationship management involves considering stakeholders in decision making to guide the organisation achieve an effective CSR policy. Managing stakeholders‟

expectations leads to sustainability by having an increment in financial gain and the entire organisational process moving in a defined continuous way. Competitiveness is strengthened if the perception of stakeholders on the ability of organisation to succeed by innovating new effective techniques is realised and more priority is placed on striking a balance between stakeholder expectations and what the organisation can offer. Environmental management is integrated in CSR activities to attain sustainability by effective use of resources and reduction of harmful practices to the environment. Corporate sustainability and reputation is directly influenced by environmental management while corporate competitiveness get added advantage whenever environmental protection initiatives are emphasised by managers in their CSR and decision making process. Corporate businesses in all parts of the world realised corporate reputation to reflect effectiveness of competitive strategies in order to face and outsmart competitors. The need to increase financial performance drives towards imbibing all corporate strategies that are aligned with attaining sustainability both in efficient resource utilisation and continuous favorable financial performance. Innovative management skills is required in formulating and fine tuning all corporate strategies, at the same time competitiveness, sustainability and reputation are all feasible and perfected by innovating new advanced techniques in production process.

Corporate Sustainability

Stakeholder Relationship Management Financial performance

Environmental Management

Corporate Reputation Goodwill

Customer Loyalty

Corporate Image & Identity Organisational Standing

Balancing expectations & Organisational actions

Corporate Competitiveness Stakeholder expectations

Research & Development Marketing strategies

Responsibility based on Cultural Values/Religion Corporate Performance

Innovation

Satisfaction of stakeholders

CSR

76

Finally, the paper concludes by combining all the factors (i.e corporate sustainability, corporate reputation, and corporate competitiveness) that are impacted by implementation of CSR. In other words, if CSR is properly implemented there is an expectation of increase in achieving sustainability, reputation building and competitiveness. The conceptual framework below illustrates this expression.

Fig 4 – A Proposed Conceptual Framework

References

Ayres, R. (1989). Industrial metabolism and global change. International social sciences journal, 121: 23-42

Baah, C. Opoku-Angyeman, D. Kwasi, S.A., & Faibil, D. (2021). Examining the correlations between stakeholder pressures, green production practices, firm reputation, environmental and financial performance: Evidence from manufacturing SMEs.

Sustainable production and consumption, 27, pp.100-114

Barnet, M.L. (2007). Stakeholder influence capacity and the variability of financial returns to corporate social responsibility. Academy of management review, 32(3): 794-816 Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of

management, 17(1): 99-121

Brammer, S. J., & Pavelin, S. (2006). Corporate reputation and social performance: The importance of fit. Journal of management studies, 43(3): 435-455

Carmeli, A. (2004). The link between organizational elements, perceived external prestige and performance. Corporate Reputation Review, 6(4), 314-331

Dadgar, Y. (2005). An Analysis of the Relationship between the Interest-free Financing System and Sustainable Development: The Case of Iran, In M. Iqbal & A. Ahmad (Eds.), Islamic Finance and Economic Development, New York: Palgrave Macmillan Danso, A., Adomako, S., Lartey, T., & Diana, J.A. (2020). Stakeholder integration, environmental sustainability orientation and financial performance. Journal of business research, 119, pp.652-662

Davies, G., Chun, R., Silvia, R., & Roper, S. (2003). Corporate reputation and competitiveness. London: Routledge

Davies, G., Chun, R., Silvia, R., & Roper, S. (2004). Corporate character scale to assess employee and customer views of organization reputation. Corporate Reputation Review, 7(2), 125-146

Esen, E. (2015). The influence of corporate social Responsibility (CSR) activities on building corporate reputation. International Business, Sustainability and Corporate Social Responsibility, Vol. 11, pp. 133-150

CSR Implementation

Corporate Competitiveness Corporate Reputation Corporate Sustainability

Management Attitude/Support Stakeholder Management

77

Fombrun, C. J., Gardberg, N., & Sever, J. (2000). The reputation quotient: A Multi stakeholder measure of corporate reputation. Journal of Brand Management, 7(4), 241-255

Fombrun, C., & Shanley, M. (1990). What‟s in a name? Reputation building and corporate strategy. Academy of management journal, 33(2): 233-258

Fryxell, G., & Wang, J. (1994). The fortune corporate reputation index: Reputation for what?

Journal of Management, 20(1): 1-14

Garbeg, N.A., & Fombrun, C. (2006). Corporate citizenship: Creating intangible assets across institutional environment. Academy of Management Review, 33: 329-346

Haigh, M. a& Jones, M.T. (2006). The drivers of corporate social responsibility: A critical review. The Business Review, 5(2): 245-251

Hassan, Z. (2006). Sustainable development from islamic perspective: Meaning, implications and policy concerns. Journal of King Abdulazeez University: Islamic Econ, 19(1): 3-18

Hui, L.T. (2008). Combining faith and CSR: A paradigm of corporate sustainability.

International Journal of Social Economics, 35(6), 449-465

Iqbal, M. (2005) Introduction in M. Iqbal (Ed.), Islamic Perspectives on Sustainable Development, United Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan

Jared, M., Rashid, M.R., Hussain, G., & Ali, H.Y. (2020). The effects of corporate social responsibility on corporate reputation and firm financial performance: Moderating role of responsible leadership. Corporate social responsibility and environmental management, 27 (3), 1395-1409

Kay, J. (1993). Foundations of Corporate Success. London: Oxford University Press

Lai, C., Chiu, C., Yang, C., & Pai, D. (2010). The effects of corporate social responsibility on brand performance: The mediating effect of industrial brand equity and corporate reputation. Journal of Business Ethics, 95, pp. 457-469

Lewis, S. (2003). Reputation and corporate responsibility. Journal of Communication Management, 7(4), 356-366

Maden, C., Arikan, E., Telci, E. E., & Kantur, D. (2012). Linking corporate social responsibility to corporate reputation: A study on understanding behavioral consequences, Procedia – Social & Behavioral Sciences, 58: 655-664

Mitchell, R. K., Angle, B.R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts.

Academy of Management Review, 22(4): 853-887

Mojtahidi, M., Lan, B. O. (2017). Critical attributes for proactive engagement of stakeholders in disaster risk management. International journal of disaster risk reduction, 21, pp.35-43

Ochoti, G.N., Muatche, S., Ronoh, P.K., & Maronga, E. (2013). Corporate Social Responsibility, Client Satisfaction and Competitive advantage in Retail Banking Institutions in Kenya. International Journal of Arts & Commerce, 2(2): 161-173 Page, G., & Fearn, H. (2005). Corporate reputation: What do consumers really care about?

Journal of Advertising Research, 45(3): 305-313

Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12): 78-92

Rettab, B., Brik, A.B., & Mellahi, K. (2009). A study of management perceptions of the impact of corporate social responsibility on organisational performance in emerging economies: The case of Dubai. Journal of business ethics, 89: 371-390

Saeidi, S.P., Sofian, S., Saeidi, P., & Alireza, S.S. (2015). How does corporate social responsibility contribute to firm financial performance? The mediating role of

78

competitive advantage, reputation and customer satisfaction. Journal of business research, 68(2): 341-350

Smith, W.J., Wokutch, R.E., Harrington, K.V., & Dennis, B. S. (2001). An examination of the influence of diversity and stakeholder role on corporate social orientation.

Business and Society, 40(3): 266-294

Sobhani, F.A., Zainuddin, Y., & Amran, A. (2011). Religion as an emerging institutional factor behind sustainability disclosure practices in Bangladesh: The case of an Islamic bank. World journal of social sciences, 1(1): 69-85

Theodoulidis, B., Diaz, D., Crotto, F., & Elisa, R. (2017). Exploring corporate social responsibility and financial performance through stakeholder theory in the tourism industries. Tourism management, 62, pp.173-188

Vilanova, M., Lozano, J.M., & Arenas, D. (2009). Exploring the nature of the relationship between CSR and competitiveness. Journal of business ethics, 87: 57-69

Vuong, Q., La, V., & Nguyen, H.T. (2020). Identifying the moral-practical gaps in corporate social responsibility missions of Vietnamese firms: An event based analysis of sustainability feasibility. Corporate social responsibility and environmental management, 28(1), pp.30-41

Wartick, S. L. (2002). Measuring corporate reputation: Definition and data. Business Society, 41(4): 371-392

Yoon, Y., Canli, Z., & Schwarz, N. (2006). The effect of corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities on companies with bad reputations. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(4): 377-390

79

Poverty, Inequality and Population