Editors' comments: Is corporate social responsibility research undertheorized?

• Main Authors: WANG, Heli, GIBSON, Cristina, ZANDER, Udo
• Format: text
• Language: English
• Published: Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University 2020
• Subjects: Corporate social responsibility; Business Law, Public Responsibility, and Ethics
• Online Access: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/6570; https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/lkcsb_research/article/7569/viewcontent/amr.2019.0450.pdf
• Institution: Singapore Management University

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a concept that has brought about both progress and controversy. Under the banner of CSR, we have made progress in addressing some of the world’s most pressing challenges, yet corporations still struggle to figure out where, how, and when to devote their social efforts, and doubts abound as to whether corporate efforts are truly in the public’s best interest. Scholarly interest in CSR research has also flourished. As a pervasive topic in the business literature, CSR is being addressed not only in the management field but also in the domains of economics, finance, marketing, operations, and sociology. Accordingly, various theoretical perspectives, including stakeholder theory, resource-based theory, upper echelons theory, institutional theory, behavioral theory, economic theories of information and incentives, and so on, have been adopted in CSR research, examining both the antecedents and consequences of CSR, as well as some unique firm behaviors associated with it (Wang, Tong, Takeuchi, & George, 2016). Moreover, at a more micro level, studies have utilized psychological theories of motivation, social exchange, justice, and learning to understand the involvement of employees, both current and prospective, in CSR activities (e.g., Caligiuri, Mencin, & Jiang, 2013; Lee, Song, Lee, Lee, & Bernhard, 2013; Lin, Lyau, Tsai, Chen, & Chiu, 2010; Mueller, Hattrup, Spiess, & Lin-Hi, 2012; Rupp, Shao, Thornton, & Skarlicki, 2013; Slack, Corlett, & Morris, 2015). Despite the application of diverse theoretical perspectives, the field has often been criticized for a lack of coherent theory (Friedman & Miles, 2002; Hilliard, 2019; Jones, Harrison, & Felps, 2018) and for theory not sufficiently developed to inform practice (Aguinis & Glavas, 2012). Here we briefly review current criticisms of CSR research and practice and then offer a way forward.