Top executives' perceptions of the inclusion of corporate social responsibility in quality management
| Author | Selina Neri,Abdelmounaim Lahrech,Ashly H. Pinnington,Husam‐Aldin N. Al‐Malkawi |
| Date | 01 October 2019 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12235 |
| Published date | 01 October 2019 |
Business Ethics: A Eur Rev. 2019;28:441–458. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/beer
|
441
© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
1 | INTRODUCTION
Global responsibility is a term that refers to g lobal corporations “op‐
erating in a way that m eets or exceeds s ociety's eth ical, legal, an d
public expectations” (Gómez‐Bezares, Przychodzen, & Przychodzen,
2017, p. 4), and requires these corp orations to “manage responsib ly
as well as profita bly” (Waddock, Bod well, & Graves, 2002, p. 132) at
a global level. It is p redicted to play a ma jor role in shaping q uality
in the 21st centur y (America n Society for Qu ality, 2015; European
Commission, 20 01; McAdam & Leonard, 200 3), and business adop‐
tion of corporate social responsibility (CSR ) is one indicatio n of the
executives' willi ngness to be held a ccountable for a ctions that im‐
pact stakeh olders. CSR e ncompasses a wid e range of responsi bili‐
ties (for instan ce, social accountability an d sustainability) (Frynas &
Yamahaki, 2016), although d istinctions made be tween responsibilit y
and sustaina bility have becom e blurred (Bans al & Song, 2017). In
this study, we defin e CSR as “actions taken by the firm i ntended to
further so cial goods beyond the direc t interests of the firm an d that
which is require d by law” (Doh & Guay, 2006, p. 47). Social goods (a nd
the social dime nsion of construc ts presented in this study) ref er to
the interest s of society and the natur al environment (Bansa l & Song,
2017). This definit ion of CSR is aligned with t he conceptualization of
CSR pract ices and behaviors as dis cretionary and volu ntary (Gómez‐
Bezares, Przychodzen, & Przychodzen, 2017).
Given the releva nce of CSR to the quality moveme nt and schol‐
arly interest i n the relationshi p between total q uality manage ment
(TQM) and CSR (G hobadian, Gall ear, & Hopkins, 2007; Hazl ett,
McAdam, & Mur ray, 2007; Martín‐Ga itero & Escrig‐Tena, 2018;
McAdam & Leon ard, 2003; Opp enheim & Przas nyski, 1999; Sila,
2018; Spencer, 1994; Tarí, 2011; Vinten, 1998; van der Wie le, Kok,
McKenna, & Brown, 2 001; van Marrewij k, 2003; Zwetsloot, 2003),
obtaining imp roved knowledge of man agerial persp ectives on CS R
in the specifi c context of quality man agement is an import ant step in
assessing the p otential for inc reased adopt ion of CSR. A s Singhapa kdi,
Vitell, Ralla palli, and Kraf t (1996) claim, individual pe rceptions of
social respons ibility “can and should” be anal yzed (p. 1132). Hence,
this paper aims to co ntribute to aca demic knowledge o n how top
executives per ceive their social r esponsibilit y in the context of
Received:28Jun e2018
|
Revised:10March2 019
|
Accepted:2July2 019
DOI: 10 .1111/bee r.12235
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Top executives' perceptions of the inclusion of corporate social
responsibility in quality management
Selina Neri1 | Ashly H. Pinnington2 | Abdelmounaim Lahrech2 |
Husam‐Aldin N. Al‐Malkawi2
1Faculty of Mana gement, Hult Inter national
Business Sch ool, Dubai, Unite d Arab
Emirates
2Faculty of Busi ness and Law, The Brit ish
Universit y in Dubai, Dubai, Un ited Arab
Emirates
Correspondence
Selina Neri, Faculty of Business, Hult
International Business School, Dubai
Internet City, Abdullah Omran Taryam
Street, P.O. Box 502988 , Dubai, United Ara b
Emirates.
Email: selina.neri@faculty.hult.edu
Abstract
Exercise of global res ponsibility is criti cal to the future of qual ity practice s in
business, and corp orate social responsi bility (CSR) is rel evant to the quality move ‐
ment. However, not much is known about management perceptions of CSR in the
specific context of qu ality management . This paper examine s top executives' views
on CSR and quality management implemented through the European Foundation
for Quality Manage ment (EFQM) framework. We repo rt the results of a su rvey of
executives in a multinat ional corporation oper ating in the outsourcin g and technology
services industry. The main factors influencing managerial perceptions were value
generation, industry forces, institutional and stakeholder pressures, and organiza‐
tional values and b eliefs. In contrast to p revious studies, we fo und limited evidence
supporting th e influence of shareholder pressure s, competition, or the business c ase
for CSR. We conclude d that company lifecycle, changes in ownersh ip structure, and
owners' orientation toward CSR influenced its potential for adoption through imple‐
mentation of the EFQM qual ity framework.
442
|
NERI Et al.
quality mana gement. This st udy was conduct ed in a multination al
corporation h eadquartered in Asia a nd operating in the out sourcing
and technolog y services industr y. At the time of this research stu dy
only one subsidia ry had adopted CSR, a nd it had done so to comply
with national regulatory requirements. Such demonstrable lack of
uptake has signif icant implications for th e moral obligations of busi‐
ness and the eth ical influence of CSR (Ban sal & Song, 2017).
This study conc entrates on one gr oup of top executives a nd
their percepti ons and attitu des toward the poten tial inclusion of
CSR in the compa ny's approach to qu ality, adopting th e European
Foundation for Qu ality Managem ent (EFQM) quality f ramework
to guide the firm's j ourney toward busi ness excellence. EFQ M is a
European mode l based on TQM (Dale, Ba mford, & van der Wie le,
2016) and is a mainstrea m institution withi n the quality managem ent
tradition. EFQ M has become increasingly associ ated with CSR (van
Marrewijk et al. , 2004), as it combines quali ty management and ele‐
ments of CSR (Ma rtín‐Gaitero & Escrig‐Tena, 2018; Tarí, 2011) such
as optimizing beh avior, emphasizing the r esponsibilit y of firms to‐
ward stakehol ders, and advancing eth ical practices by adhe ring to a
code of conduct . The literature indicates th at external factors such
as stakeholder expectations, shareholder interests, and the context
of business oper ations affec t organization al CSR pract ices (Reid &
Toffel, 2009; Vashche nko, 2017; Wright & Nyberg, 2017), an d that
executive perce ptions of CSR are deeply rooted i n personal and or‐
ganizational b eliefs and values (Besc horner & Hajduk, 2016; Russel l,
2010). Furthermo re, some executi ves indicate that d emonstratin g
commitment to so cial purposes is a d ifferentiati ng factor in the ir
industries, that intra‐ and cross‐sector partnerships are important,
and that greater co llaboration wi th governments is c rucial (United
Nations Global Compact‐Accenture, 2016).
Demands on comp anies to address s ocietal expe ctations have
become an important aspect of contemporary business. Global
initiatives suc h as the United Natio ns Global Compa ct, current ly
having over 12,0 00 signatories i n more than 160 count ries (United
Nations Global Compact, 2018), encourage companies to embrace
CSR based on th e assumption that i t is good for busines s. Scholars
argue that fir ms acting vir tuously achieve e xcellence in the for m
of better quali ty, higher custome r satisfacti on, and lower turn over
(Cameron, 20 03), and that comp anies that base th eir strategies o n
the protectio n of society and t he natural enviro nment “should see
this strategic e mphasis as a benef it” (Gómez‐Be zares et al., 2017,
p. 1). The corporat ion we researche d is one of the many makin g
limited respon se to the call for C SR made by academ ics and poli‐
cymakers over th e last three dec ades. In the cont ext of extensive
societal deb ates on the social responsibi lity of corporations and t he
fact that many co mpanies remain a mbiguous about w hat it means
to be socially res ponsible, this p aper aims to provide m ore insight
into how top executi ves perceive CSR. Going be yond CSR adoption
based on minimal l egal compliance , this study off ers insights into
how top executives p erceive CSR and its links to qua lity, what role
it plays in enablin g value generati on, and which fac tors influen ce
executive atte ntion and motivate a doption of CSR . Consequent ly,
our research qu estion in this study co ncerns exploring whi ch factors
most strongl y influence top executi ves' perceptions of CSR a nd their
resistance to integrating social responsibility with mainstream pro‐
cesses of quality management.
The findings f rom our survey in dicated that val ue generation,
industry forces, institutional and stakeholder pressures, and organi‐
zational value s and beliefs were the main fac tors influencing mana‐
gerial perceptions. However, we found little evidence supporting the
influence of share holder pressu res, competit ion, and the busin ess
case for CSR , suggesting that company life cycle, changes in owner‐
ship struct ure, and owners' o rientation towa rd CSR influenc ed its
potential for ado ption through the EFQM quali ty framework.
The remainder of t his paper is structured as fo llows: First, a re‐
view of the qualit y management and CS R literature is provide d to es‐
tablish the ba ckground of the stu dy; second, the conce ptual model is
introduced, ba sed on 10 dimensions of CSR perce ptions and 11 sets
of industry, stakeholder, institutional, and competitive influences;
and third, the re search methodolog y is explained. The fo llowing sec‐
tions then report and discuss the main findings, followed by implica‐
tions, contributions, and conclusions.
2 | LITERATURE RE VIEW
2.1 | Qual ity management and CSR
An influential g roup of scholars and pra ctitioners advoc ate that CSR
is the next step i n quality manage ment (America n Society for Qua lity,
2015; European Comm ission, 2001; Mar tín‐Gaiter o & Escrig‐Tena,
2018; Tarí, 2011; van Marrewijk et al. , 2004) and that i t represents
one of the issues re levant to the busine ss excellence movem ent in
this century, alon g with consumer awarene ss, globalization, s peed of
change, the fut ure workforce, and the agi ng population.
Several studies have uncovered theoretical relationships be‐
tween quality management and CSR, discussing their implications
for the future of th e latter (Ghobadian et al., 20 07; Hazlett et al.,
2007; Martín‐G aitero & Escrig‐Tena, 2018; McAdam & L eonard,
2003; Oppe nheim & Przasnysk i, 1999; Sila, 2018; Spence r, 1994;
Tarí, 2011; van der Wiele et al., 20 01; van Marrewij k, 2003;
Vinten, 1998; Zwetsloo t, 2003). For exampl e, Vinten (1998) argues
that the ethic al dimensions of TQM and CSR are s imilar and justify
the involvement of th e quality movem ent in issues of ethic s and
debates on CSR . Concepts of et hics (and ethic al dimensions and
behaviors) have alway s to be contextualized an d related to specific
periods of time, p eople, and org anizations (Don aldson & Dunfee,
1994) or, as Bowen (1953) argued, they are likely to b e appreciated
to the extent the y are desirable in relati on to the values and objec‐
tives of societie s and their commun ities. In this pa per, we define
the purpose of ethic s as “being moral , and doing what is right, just ,
and fair” (Jam ali, 2008, p . 215). This definitio n is appropriate to
the context of the s tudy as it refers t o societal expe ctations of
business act ivities, for ins tance, avert ing social injur y, respecting
people, or doin g no harm. Appre ciation of ethics i nvolves reflec‐
tion on the exercis e of morality an d what constitute s good and
right behavior (B esio & Pronzini, 2014). For genuine eth ical debate
To continue reading
Request your trial