Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Corporate social responsibility and firm performance: The mediating role of marketing competence and the moderating role of market environment

  • Published:
Asia Pacific Journal of Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The influence of corporate social responsibility (CSR) on firm performance in developed economies has been studied extensively. However, extant studies provide mixed findings on the relationship between CSR and firm performance in emerging economies. Drawing on stakeholder theory and institutional theory, we look at CSR in China, taking a multi-dimensional view of CSR and introducing marketing competence as an important intermediate between CSR and firm performance. We also use a contingent perspective to examine the role of market environments in moderating the impact of CSR on marketing competence. The findings of an empirical study conducted in China show that marketing competence fully mediates the effects of all CSR activities on firm performance. Competitive intensity weakens the positive impact of CSR toward employees on marketing competence, while it strengthens the positive effect of CSR toward society on marketing competence. The positive relationship between CSR toward customers and marketing competence is enhanced by market turbulence. The results of this study highlight the importance of CSR to marketing competence and firm performance in China.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. 2012. What we know and don’t know about corporate social responsibility: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 38(4): 932–968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. 1991. Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions: Newbury Park, CA; Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arya, B., & Zhang, G. 2009. Institutional reforms and investor reactions to CSR announcements: Evidence from an emerging economy. Journal of Management Studies, 46 (7): 1089–1112.

  • Barney, J. 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1): 99–120.

  • Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. 1986. The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6): 1173–1182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baughn, C. C., Bodie, N. L., & McIntosh, J. C. 2007. Corporate social and environmental responsibility in Asian countries and other geographical regions. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 14 (4): 189–205.

  • Ben Brik, A., Rettab, B., & Mellahi, K. 2011. Market orientation, corporate social responsibility, and business performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 99(3): 307–324.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloomberg BusinessWeek. (2013). Corporate social responsibility reports in China: Progress or greenwashing?

  • Boehe, D., & Barin Cruz, L. 2010. Corporate social responsibility, product differentiation strategy and export performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 91: 325–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. J., & Dacin, P. A. 1997. The company and the product: Corporate associations and consumer product responses. Journal of Marketing, 61(1): 68–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. 1979. A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4): 497–505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. 1991. The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4): 39–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B., & Shabana, K. M. 2010. The business case for corporate social responsibility: A review of concepts, research and practice. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1): 85–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, B. H. 1999. Marketing performance measures: History and interrelationships. Journal of Marketing Management, 15(8): 711–732.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson, M. B. E. 1995. A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 20(1): 92–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamantopoulos, A., & Winklhofer, H. M. 2001. Index construction with formative indicators: An alternative to scale development. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2): 269–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conant, J. S., Mokwa, M. P., & Varadarajan, P. R. 1990. Strategic types, distinctive marketing competencies and organizational performance: A multiple measures-based study. Strategic Management Journal, 11(5): 365–383.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. 1995. The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1): 65–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. 2007. Reaping relational rewards from corporate social responsibility: The role of competitive positioning. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 24(3): 224–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dutta, S., Zbaracki, M. J., & Bergen, M. 2003. Pricing process as a capability: A resource-based perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 24(7): 615.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fang, E., Palmatier, R. W., & Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M. 2008. Effect of service transition strategies on firm value. Journal of Marketing, 72(5): 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, I., & Hasnaoui, A. 2011. The meaning of corporate social responsibility: The vision of four nations. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(3): 419–443.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. 1984. Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. 1999. Divergent stakeholder theory. Academy of Management Review, 24(2): 233–236.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. 1970. A Friedman doctrine: The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Times Magazine, 13: 33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gebauer, H. 2008. Identifying service strategies in product manufacturing companies by exploring environment-strategy configurations. Industrial Marketing Management, 37(3): 278–291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerbing, D. W., & Anderson, J. C. 1988. An updated paradigm for scale development incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment. Journal of Marketing Research, 25(2): 186–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gliem, J. A., & Gliem, R. R. (2003). Calculating, interpreting, and reporting Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient for Likert-type scales. Midwest Research-to-Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education.

  • Graafland, J. J. 2002. Profits and principles: Four perspectives. Journal of Business Ethics, 35(4): 293–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffeth, R. W., Hom, P. W., & Gaertner, S. 2000. A meta-analysis of antecedents and correlates of employee turnover: Update, moderator tests, and research implications for the next millennium. Journal of Management, 26(3): 463–488.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, S., Dunford, B., Boss, A., Boss, R., & Angermeier, I. 2011. Corporate social responsibility and the benefits of employee trust: A cross-disciplinary perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(1): 29–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • He, Y., Tian, Z., & Chen, Y. 2007. Performance implications of nonmarket strategy in China. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 24(2): 151–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoeffler, S., & Keller, K. L. 2002. Building brand equity through corporate societal marketing. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 21(1): 78–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homburg, C., Kuester, S., Beutin, N., & Menon, A. 2005. Determinants of customer benefits in business-to-business markets: A cross-cultural comparison. Journal of International Marketing, 13(3): 1–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homburg, C., Müller, M., & Klarmann, M. 2011. When should the customer really be king? On the optimum level of salesperson customer orientation in sales encounters. Journal of Marketing, 75(2): 55–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homburg, C., Stierl, M., & Bornemann, T. 2013. Corporate social responsibility in business-to-business markets: How organizational customers account for supplier corporate social responsibility engagement. Journal of Marketing, 77(6): 54–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoskisson, R. E., Eden, L., Lau, C. M., & Wright, M. 2000. Strategy in emerging economies. Academy of Management Journal, 43(3): 249–267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hult, G. T. M., & Ketchen, D. J., Jr. 2001. Does market orientation matter?: A test of the relationship between positional advantage and performance. Strategic Management Journal, 22(9): 899–906.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarvis, C. B., Mackenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, P. M., Mick, D. G., & Bearden, W. O. 2003. A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(2): 199–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaworski, B. J., & Kohli, A. K. 1993. Market orientation: Antecedents and consequences. Journal of Marketing, 57(3): 53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Julian, S. D., & Ofori-dankwa, J. C. 2013. Financial resource availability and corporate social responsibility expenditures in a sub-Saharan economy: The institutional difference hypothesis. Strategic Management Journal, 34(11): 1314–1330.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, K. L. 1993. Conceptualizing, measuring, managing customer-based brand equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1): 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, S., Frazier, G. L., & Roth, V. J. 1990. A transaction cost analysis model of channel integration in international markets. Journal of Marketing Research, 27(2): 196–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kok, P., van der Wiele, T., McKenna, R., & Brown, A. 2001. A corporate social responsibility audit within a quality management framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 31(4): 285–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, V., Jones, E., Venkatesan, R., & Leone, R. P. 2011. Is market orientation a source of sustainable competitive advantage or simply the cost of competing?. Journal of Marketing, 75(1): 16–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lai, C.-S., Chiu, C.-J., Yang, C.-F., & Pai, D.-C. 2011. The effects of corporate social responsibility on brand performance: The mediating effect of industrial brand equity and corporate reputation. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(3): 457–469.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lev, B., Petrovits, C., & Radhakrishnan, S. 2010. Is doing good good for you? How corporate charitable contributions enhance revenue growth. Strategic Management Journal, 31(2): 182–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenstein, D. R., Drumwright, M. E., & Braig, B. M. 2004. The effect of corporate social responsibility on customer donations to corporate-supported nonprofits. Journal of Marketing, 68(4): 16–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. 2001. Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1): 114–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luo, X., & Bhattacharya, C. B. 2006. Corporate social responsibility, customer satisfaction, and market value. Journal of Marketing, 70(4): 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackey, A., Mackey, T. B., & Barney, J. B. 2007. Corporate social responsibility and firm performance: Investor preferences and corporate strategies. Academy of Management Review, 32(3): 817–835.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maertz, C. P., Jr., & Griffeth, R. W. 2004. Eight motivational forces and voluntary turnover: A theoretical synthesis with implications for research. Journal of Management, 30(5): 667–683.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maignan, I., Ferrell, O. C., & Ferrell, L. 2005. A stakeholder model for implementing social responsibility in marketing. European Journal of Marketing, 39(9–10): 956–977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maignan, I., Ferrell, O. C., & Hult, G. T. M. 1999. Corporate citizenship: Cultural antecedents and business benefits. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27(4): 455.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. 2003. Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2): 268–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, D., Puffer, S., Dunlap, D., & Jaeger, A. 2012. A stakeholder approach to the ethicality of BRIC-firm managers’ use of favors. Journal of Business Ethics, 109(1): 27–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. 2000. Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: Correlation or misspecification?. Strategic Management Journal, 21(5): 603–609.

    Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. 2001. Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26(1): 117–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. S. 2011. Creating and capturing value: Strategic corporate social responsibility, resource-based theory, and sustainable competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 37(5): 1480–1495.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. P., & Covin, J. G. 2000. Environmental marketing: A source of reputational, competitive, and financial advantage. Journal of Business Ethics, 23(3): 299–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, S., & Suar, D. 2010. Does corporate social responsibility influence firm performance of Indian companies?. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(4): 571–601.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, N. A., Vorhies, D. W., & Mason, C. H. 2009. Market orientation, marketing capabilities, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 30(8): 909–920.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nath, P., Nachiappan, S., & Ramanathan, R. 2010. The impact of marketing capability, operations capability and diversification strategy on performance: A resource-based view. Industrial Marketing Management, 39(2): 317–329.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, C. 1991. Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16(1): 145–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. 2003. Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24(3): 403–441.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng, M. W., & Heath, P. S. 1996. The growth of the firm in planned economies in transition: Institutions, organizations, and strategic choice. Academy of Management Review, 21(2): 492–528.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. 1985. Competitive strategy: Creating and sustaining superior performance. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., Kramer, M. R., & Zadek, S. 2007. Redefining corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review.

  • Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. 2008. Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3): 879–891.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramasamy, B., & Yeung, M. 2009. Chinese consumers’ perception of corporate social responsibility (CSR). Journal of Business Ethics, 88(1): 119–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramchander, S., Schwebach, R. G., & Staking, K. I. M. 2012. The informational relevance of corporate social responsibility: Evidence from DS400 index reconstitutions. Strategic Management Journal, 33(3): 303–314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rettab, B., Brik, A., & 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(3): 371–390.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, K. E., & Beatty, S. E. 1999. Customer benefits and company consequences of customer-salesperson relationships in retailing. Journal of Retailing, 75(1): 11–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruf, B. M., Muralidhar, K., Brown, R. M., Janney, J. J., & Paul, K. 2001. An empirical investigation of the relationship between change in corporate social performance and financial performance: A stakeholder theory perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 32(2): 143–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. 2001. Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2): 225–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheng, S., Zhou, K. Z., & Li, J. J. 2011. The effects of business and political ties on firm performance: Evidence from China. Journal of Marketing, 75(1): 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slater, S. F., & Narver, J. C. 1994a. Does competitive environment moderate the market orientation- performance relationship?. Journal of Marketing, 58(1): 46–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slater, S. F., & Narver, J. C. 1994b. Market orientation, customer value, and superior performance. Business Horizons, 37(2): 22–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, J. 2013. America’s most generous companies. Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacquelynsmith/2013/07/16/americas-most-generous-companies/. Accessed Jan 28 2015.

  • Surroca, J., Tribo, J. A., & Waddock, S. 2010. Corporate responsibility and financial performance: The role of intangible resources. Strategic Management Journal, 31(5): 463–490.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, D. L. 1999. Toward an integrative theory of business and society: A research strategy for corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 24(3): 506–521.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turban, D. B., & Greening, D. W. 1997. Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees. Academy of Management Journal, 40(3): 658–672.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turker, D. 2009. Measuring corporate social responsibility: A scale development study. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(4): 411–427.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varadarajan, P. R., & Menon, A. 1988. Cause-related marketing: A coalignment of marketing strategy and corporate philanthropy. Journal of Marketing, 52(3): 58–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venkatraman, N., & Prescott, J. E. 1990. Environment-strategy coalignment: An empirical test of its performance implications. Strategic Management Journal, 11(1): 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. 1997. The corporate social performance-financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18(4): 303–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wan, S. Y., & Liu, Z. Y. 2013. Institutional background, company value and social responsibility cost: The evidence from listed companies of CSI300 index. Nankai Business Review, 16(1): 110–121 (in Chinese).

  • Wang, H., & Qian, C. 2011. Corporate philanthropy and corporate financial performance: The role of stakeholder response and political access. Academy of Management Journal, 54(6): 1159–1181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xue, D. Y., & Zhang, L. 2004. Nongfu Spring: “one cent” undertaking. China Businessman, 5: 54–56 (in Chinese).

  • Zeithaml, V. A. 1988. Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52(3): 2–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, K. Z., & Li, C. B. 2010. How strategic orientations influence the building of dynamic capability in emerging economies. Journal of Business Research, 63(3): 224–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, K. Z., & Poppo, L. 2010. Exchange hazards, relational reliability, and contracts in China: The contingent role of legal enforceability. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(5): 861–881.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, K. Z., Yim, C. K., & Tse, D. K. 2005. The effects of strategic orientations on technology- and market-based breakthrough innovations. Journal of Marketing, 69(2): 42–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, L., & Huang, J. 2012. Corporate social responsibility and performance of family business: The moderating effect of internal capability and external relationship. Journal of Business Economics, 247(5): 5–15.

  • Zimmerman, M. A., & Zeitz, G. J. 2002. Beyond survival: Achieving new venture growth by building legitimacy. Academy of Management Review, 27(3): 414–431.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Marketing, School of Business Administration, Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, No.555, Liutai Road, Wenjiang District, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

    Xuan Bai

  2. Department of Marketing, City University of Hong Kong, Tat Chee Avenue, Kowloon, Hong Kong

    Jeanine Chang

Authors
  1. Xuan Bai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jeanine Chang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xuan Bai.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 4 Measurement items
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bai, X., Chang, J. Corporate social responsibility and firm performance: The mediating role of marketing competence and the moderating role of market environment. Asia Pac J Manag 32, 505–530 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-015-9409-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-015-9409-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation