Conference PaperPDF Available

The State of Corporate Citizenship 2014

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

This study, conducted by the Boston College Center for Corporate Citizenship in the Carroll School of Management, is the sixth biennial examination of the attitudes and commitments of business executives toward corporate citizenship. In the decade plus that the Center has conducted this survey, corporate citizenship has come a long way. While the first study in 2003 found that these investments were considered discretionary by the bulk of executive respondents, the majority now report that corporate citizenship contributes to achieving key goals. Since the study was first administered in 2003, corporate citizenship has gone from being the purview of a handful of ideologically-driven business people to a practice that is now considered a non-negotiable part of business strategy. The role of corporate citizenship is only expected to increase going forward. The very first State of Corporate Citizenship survey found that 46% of respondents perceived “a lack of resources” to be the greatest obstacle to corporate citizenship and only 30% had plans to increase investment going forward. In 2012, companies began to prioritize corporate citizenship as they hadn't before, and—for the first time—the majority of executive respondents anticipated that corporate citizenship resources would be sustained or increased over a three-year period. Our current study finds that this trend continues, and predicts that resources for every corporate citizenship dimension will increase in the near future.
Content may be subject to copyright.
THE STATE OF CORPORATE
CITIZENSHIP 2014 ccc.bc.edu
THE STATE OF
CORPORATE CITIZENSHIP
1 Executive summary
2 Adjusting to an evolving operating context
2 The current context for corporate citizenship
3 Infographic: Corporate citizenship—a necesary investment for success
4 Selected findings
5 Economic context for business
5 Future expectations
7 Executives in most industries are walking on the sunny side of the street
9 Integration of corporate citizenship and business goals
9 Integration creates business value
11 How corporate reputation increases value
12 Encouraging wellness to cut costs
13 Competing for talent
14 Alignment of corporate citizenship
14 Creating business value
14 Stakeholders in focus
16 Priorities and contributions to company success
17 Emerging priorities
17 The importance of industry
18 Contributing to success
18 Protecting stakeholders from the breach: consumer data protection and privacy
19 Prioritizing social investments
19 Executive and consumer perspectives on social issues
20 Delving into the divide
22 Bridging the gap
23 Supporting small businesses to achieve the American Dream
24 Breaking through to clean water
25 Commitment to corporate citizenship
25 The long-term view
26 Corporate citizenship dimensions: past and future
28 Cutting back on carbon, mile by mile
29 Conclusion
30 Profile of companies surveyed and methodology
32 References
© Copyright 2014 Boston College Center for Corporate Citizenship. All rights reserved. This publication was
prepared by Boston College Center for Corporate Citizenship and may not be reprinted without permission.
Table of Contents
boston college center for corporate citizenship carroll school of management 1
THE STATE OF
CORPORATE CITIZENSHIP
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The message delivered in the 2014 State of Corporate Citizenship is clear: Executives
understand the value of corporate citizenship and are putting their money where their
mouths are—investing in environmental, social, and governance (ESG) processes
and programs that deliver business and social value.
The majority of executive
respondents report that
corporate citizenship
contributes to achieving
key business goals.
This study, conducted by the Boston College Center for
Corporate Citizenship in the Carroll School of
Management, is the sixth biennial examination of the
attitudes and commitments of business executives
toward corporate citizenship. Though the majority of
our executive respondents over the years have led
companies with global operations, it is the first State
of Corporate Citizenship study to include responses
from executive respondents located outside of the
United States.
In the decade plus that the Center has conducted
this survey, corporate citizenship has come a long way.
While the first study in 2003 found that these invest-
ments were considered discretionary by the bulk of
executive respondents, the majority now report that
corporate citizenship contributes to achieving key goals.
Since the study was first administered in 2003,
corporate citizenship has gone from being the purview
of a handful of ideologically-driven business people to a
practice that is now considered a non-negotiable part of
business strategy. The role of corporate citizenship is
only expected to increase going forward.
The very first State of Corporate Citizenship survey
found that 46% of respondents perceived “a lack of
resources” to be the greatest obstacle to corporate
citizenship and only 30% had plans to increase
investment going forward. In 2012, companies began
to prioritize corporate citizenship as they hadn’t before,
and—for the first time—the majority of executive
respondents anticipated that corporate citizenship
resources would be sustained or increased over a
three-year period. Our current study finds that this
trend continues, and predicts that resources for every
corporate citizenship dimension will increase in the
near future.
While investment in corporate citizenship is
predicted to increase, the primary business motivation
for corporate citizenship has changed. Company
traditions and values were cited as the key drivers of
corporate citizenship in earlier studies. In 2009, 70%
of executives reported that reputation, as well as
company traditions and values, were key drivers of
corporate citizenship. In 2012 and 2014, enhancing
reputation continues to be a major driver of these
state of corporate citizenship 2014
2
eorts—as well as attracting and retaining customers.
Value-creation is reported, as well, through mecha-
nisms including supply chain management, accessing
new markets, and lowering employee turnover.
Though value-creation mechanisms vary by industry, it
is clear that when companies consider corporate
citizenship as part of business strategy, more is being
expected—and successfully realized.
Adjusting to an evolving operating context
Companies are aligning their corporate citizenship to
both address operating context challenges and to take
advantage of the benefits that are oered by adopting
more sustainable business practices. Environmental
risks, the rising cost of health care, and the financial
and reputational risks associated with our global and
digital business and social communications environ-
ments are just a few of the complexities facing
companies today. By investing in corporate citizenship,
executives are meeting these challenges and dierenti-
ating their companies as responsible leaders.
Companies are using their corporate citizenship
programs to address issues of concern to customers
and other stakeholders in a variety of ways. Among
executive respondents in this study, concerns with data
protection and privacy and engaging supply chain
partners in corporate citizenship programs emerge as
issues of higher concern than in past years.
The emergence of these issues as being of signifi-
cant concern to a considerably greater number of
executives suggests that executives have seen the
damage that can be done to company value and
reputation when negative events occur—regardless of
where they happen in the value chain. The focus on
Companies are aligning
their corporate
citizenship to both
address operating context
challenges and to take
advantage of the benefits
that are oered by
adopting more
sustainable business
practices.
these issues highlights also the enterprisewide nature
of corporate citizenship eorts. Data security, for
example, will have its larger budget, headcount, and
line of responsibility in the corporate IT department,
but protection of personal data is not only a business
operational issue, it is also a societal issue. More than
ever, corporate citizenship is a practice that crosses
departments and verticals. IT is handling the physical
and information architectural security of the business
environment, AND in many companies, corporate
citizenship departments are designing programs to
educate employees and customers about how they can
help protect privacy and create a safe information and
e-commerce superhighway.
The current context for corporate citizenship
Despite an improving economy, companies are
contending with an increasingly complex and rapidly
evolving business environment. Along just about any
operational area of business you will find an issue
related to corporate citizenship—whether you are
finding environmental or human rights risks in the
supply chain, the rising cost of health care, or the
opportunity and risks associated with our global
and digital business and social communications
environments. Investment in corporate citizenship can
improve social and environmental issues in the
operating environment and present new models for
business that can dierentiate a firm as an innovator
that can deliver both business value and social good.
The executives in this study have armed the
value they derive from, and their commitment to,
corporate citizenship.
contributes to
company success
returns value to
shareholders
merits additional
investment
For the first time in more than a decade, executives
predict that investment will increase in the
next three years on every dimension
of corporate citizenship.
CORPORATE CITIZENSHIP
A NECESSARY INVESTMENT FOR SUCCESS
THE MAJORITY OF BUSINESS EXECUTIVES BELIEVE CORPORATE CITIZENSHIP:
...AND REPORT THAT CORPORATE CITIZENSHIP ACTIVITIES CONTRIBUTE TO COMPANY SUCCESS.
Employee volunteer programs
Sustainability
Reporting on social performance
Philanthropy/corporate giving
SUCCESS
By investing in corporate citizenship, executives are meeting challenges
and differentiating their companies as responsible leaders working to create the world
in which we want to do business, AND the world in which we want to live.
Companies where corporate citizenship is
integrated are more likely to achieve important
business objectives:
Companies dedicated to at least 4 years
of corporate citizenship are
more likely to:
Reduce employee health costs
HOW DOES
THIS HAPPEN?
Average
performance
Access to new markets Employee retention
Improve risk management
2.3x
Average
performance
3x 3.9x
2.2x
boston college center for corporate citizenship carroll school of management 3
contributes to
company success
returns value to
shareholders
merits additional
investment
For the first time in more than a decade, executives
predict that investment will increase in the
next three years on every dimension
of corporate citizenship.
CORPORATE CITIZENSHIP
A NECESSARY INVESTMENT FOR SUCCESS
THE MAJORITY OF BUSINESS EXECUTIVES BELIEVE CORPORATE CITIZENSHIP:
...AND REPORT THAT CORPORATE CITIZENSHIP ACTIVITIES CONTRIBUTE TO COMPANY SUCCESS.
Employee volunteer programs
Sustainability
Reporting on social performance
Philanthropy/corporate giving
SUCCESS
By investing in corporate citizenship, executives are meeting challenges
and differentiating their companies as responsible leaders working to create the world
in which we want to do business, AND the world in which we want to live.
Companies where corporate citizenship is
integrated are more likely to achieve important
business objectives:
Companies dedicated to at least 4 years
of corporate citizenship are
more likely to:
Reduce employee health costs
HOW DOES
THIS HAPPEN?
Average
performance
Access to new markets Employee retention
Improve risk management
2.3x
Average
performance
3x 3.9x
2.2x
state of corporate citizenship 2014
4
Selected findings
The majority of executive respondents, across all
business types and industries, confirm that corporate
citizenship helps them successfully achieve strategic
goals, ultimately improving performance.
For the first time in over a decade, the majority of
executives anticipate resources for every corporate
citizenship dimension to increase over the next three
years (see Figure 1).
Emerging issues such as employee health costs and
consumer data protection and privacy—issues with
both immediate and longer-term financial and
reputational risks—are recently prioritized issues
receiving significant attention from executives.
o By strategically integrating corporate citizenship
initiatives, companies are achieving impressive
results. Companies are 2.2x more likely to gain
access to new markets and 2.3x more likely to
report success with employee retention than
those who do not employ corporate citizenship
to address these strategically important issues.
More companies are investing in environmental,
social, and governance (ESG) reporting—and the
majority of respondents in this study predict that
the amount of ESG reporting that they do will
continue to increase in the future.
Companies that invest in corporate citizenship over
the long term are more likely to report success with
business goals than those that invest for shorter
periods. Companies with a commitment of at least
four years to corporate citizenship eorts are 3.9x
more likely to report success with reducing health
care costs, and 3x more likely to report success with
managing risk than those companies that commit to
an eort for less than one year.
There is divergence between the social issues that
executives believe their companies should be
responsible for addressing and those that concern
customers the most. The amount of divergence is
influenced to a large extent by global region.
Executive respondents are most concerned with
issues they can address with programs that focus on
their employees, while consumers are focused on
widespread social and environmental issues.
For the first time in over
a decade, the majority of
executives anticipate
resources for every
corporate citizenship
dimension to increase
in the next three years.
Consum
er data protection and privacy
Empl
oyee safety practices
Engagement
with stakeholders
Re
cycling programs
Su
stainable use of resources
Programs
to increase employee diversity
Pollutio
n prevention practices
De
velopment of environmentally friendly products
Empl
oyee volunteer programs
Communit
y economic development
Repo
rting on social performance
Philanthropy
/corporate giving
Repo
rting on environmental performance
Engagement
in political causes/campaigns
70
%
60
%
50
%
FIGURE 1
Resources will increase for corporate citizenship activities over the next three years
80
%
boston college center for corporate citizenship carroll school of management 5
Economic context for business
To better appreciate the insights outlined in this study,
it is important to understand the specific concerns of
business executives. Corporate citizenship, like most
elements of business, is dependent on the constraints
and opportunities presented by the operating context—
including the economy.
According to the Organisation for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD), the major
advanced economies are slowly recovering from the
Great Recession.1 The OECD notes that:
Private sector confidence is rebuilding.
Investment and trade have begun to revive.
The labor market is improving—though unemploy-
ment, especially long-term unemployment, is high.
Future expectations
As we move through the recovery, economic policy
debate is shifting from crisis control to the strategic
cultivation of a stable and sustainable economic
recovery. The OECD predicts that—in the near
term—global growth and trade will strengthen at a
moderate pace, as healthier corporate balance sheets
and reduced uncertainty should encourage business
investment (see Figure 2). OECD analysts highlight
ESG risks as among those that could derail progress if
not addressed. Specifically, forecasts note that:
Economic progress could be derailed if unemploy-
ment and health spending pressures are not
addressed.
Wealth and income inequality continues to be a
concern and is expected to rise (see Figure 3).2
Highlighted recently in both the popular and
business press, this concern is being addressed by
corporations in some sectors by proactively raising
their minimum wages as they recognize that their
workers are not earning enough to participate in the
economy. For example, IKEA recently joined the
ranks of companies such as Gap, Inc. and The Walt
Disney Company by pledging to increase the
minimum hourly pay of U.S. retail co-workers.3
These companies know that inequality, which both
stems from and results in unequal access to
education, health care, and infrastructure, as
well a lack of skilled experience, ultimately hurts
economic growth.
Climate change presents a large risk to growth,
potentially curbing global GDP by 1.5% by 2060 if
CO2 emissions are not addressed.4
Carbon pricing is expected to continue to be an
increasing area of exploration for regulators, business
leaders, and investors. While attempts to create a
national cap-and-trade system have failed, the Environ-
mental Protection Agency proposed in June 2014 to cut
carbon emissions from existing U.S. power plants 30%
by 2030. The EPA rule would allow states to meet
varying reduction targets by closing coal-fired power
plants, saving energy, using more renewable power or
forming regional cap-and-trade programs. In August
2014, more than 250 companies had joined a statement
organized by the World Bank Group, the World
Economic Forum, UN Global Compact, and the Prince
Corporate citizenship
is dependent on the
constraints and
opportunities presented
by the operating
context— including
the economy.
4
3
5
2
1
0
FIGURE 2
Recent and projected global grow
th
Contribution to world real
GDP growth (%)
2005
G20 - OECD* G20 - Non-OECD** Rest of the world World
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
6
-3
-2
-1
2015
Source: OECD
. (2014). OECD Economic Outlook, Vol. 2014/1. Figure 1.6. Global growth is
picking up, led by the OECD economies (p. 35). Paris: OECD Publishing
.
*
G20-OECD countries: Australia, Canada, the European Union, France, Germany, Italy,
Japan, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States
**
G20-Non-OECD countries: Argentina, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Russian Federation,
Saudi Arabia, and South Africa
Source (for G20 countries):
OECD and the G20. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/
g
20/about.htm
}
Projections
state of corporate citizenship 2014
6
of Wales’ Corporate Leaders Group encouraging
governments to explore carbon pricing methods and
set their own predictable price on carbon.5
While most companies are benefiting from the slow
recovery, our evolving global economy means the
consideration of more varied societal expectations.
Executives are not only expected to deliver stable
growth and strong financials, they have to comply
with emerging expectations that business will help
protect the planet, support the cultivation of a diverse
workforce, and ensure the health and well-being of
employees, all while maintaining their bottom line.
Our evolving global
economy means the
consideration of more
varied societal
expectations.
i OECD. (2014). All on Board: Making Inclusive Growth Happen. Paris: OECD
Publishing.
ii Pew Research. (2013). Race in America: Tracking 50 Year s of Demographic Trends.
Retrieved from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/08/22/race-demographics/
iii OECD. (2014.) All on Board.
iV Executive Oce of the President. (2014). A Year of Ac tion: Progress Repor t on Raising
the Minimum Wage. Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/
docs/minimum_wage_report2.pdf
Source for map data: Wol, E. N. (2012). The asset price meltdown and the wealth of the
middle class. Table 2. The size distribution of wealth and incom e, 1962–2010
(pp. 58–59). Retrieved from http://www.colorado.edu/AmStudies/ lewis/1025/
incomestudy2012.pdf
Calculations based on data from the 2010 Surve y of Consumer Finances
The gap between the rich and the poor across the world has grown
faster since the financial crisis than it did during the entire decade
before.i This is a trend that has been particularly pronounced in
the United States, where the gap has not just grown faster than in
most other developed nations, but has also widened along racial
and ethnic lines.ii
The consequences of income and wealth inequality are far-reaching
and getting more attention from economists, policymakers, and
companies. The immediate eects of inequality to individuals—such
as lack of access to education, health care, and advancement
opportunities—create repercussions that impact the market, the
economy, and society as a whole. In addition to these near-term
eects, economists have been pointing out that another result of
inequality is a stagnant economy. As the OECD notes, this is particu-
larly the case when the incomes of the lower and middle classes fall
behind the rest of the population.iii Companies are starting to address
this directly by raising their minimum wages above statutory levels.iv
FIGURE 3
Area of the U.S. in proportion to household wealth distribution
Source for data: Wolff, Edward. N. (2012). The Asset Price
Meltdown and the Wealth of the Middle Class. Table 2.
The Size Distribution of Wealth and Income, 1962-2010,
http://www.colorado.edu/AmStudies/lewis/1025/
incomestudy2012.pdf. Calculations based on data
from the 2010 Survey of Consumer Finance.
Top 10%
Bottom 90%
The United States map in Figure 3 represents a pie chart. Based on 2010 net worth of U.S. households,
the top 10% of U.S. households own 77% of wealth, and the bottom 90% own only 23%.
boston college center for corporate citizenship carroll school of management 7
Executives in most industries are walking on
the sunny side of the street
Despite the many competing demands executives
manage, responses about what is possible and what is
expected are more optimistic than in the two most
recent studies. As the economy has recovered, so have
companies’ corporate citizenship eorts (see Figure 4).
Now, the majority of executives report that the U.S.
economy helps their corporate citizenship eorts, and
have found their citizenship eorts strengthened in a
variety of ways.
Most sectors appear to be faring considerably better
in the current economy than they were in 2012,
especially the health care and social assistance sector.
One notable exception is the wholesale trade sector. In
2014, executive respondents in this sector report that
the economy has had an increasingly negative influence
on corporate citizenship eorts (see Figure 5).
“The economy is
improving and this allows
us to invest more money
in environmental causes
and contribute more
money to local charities.”
“Corporate citizenship is
more important than ever…
other companies may be
scaling back and [this] allows
us to increase our visibility
in this arena.”
“We’ve had to create better
and more ecient processes,
which include recycling
programs and sourcing
ingredients locally and
sustainably. We also have a
much closer and happier
sta, which has increased
our employee retention.”
Executives on
corporate citizenship
2014
2012
25
%
20
%
30
%
55
%
35
%
40
%
FIGURE 4
The percentage of executives reporting that the U.S. economy
helps their companies’ corporate citizenship efforts
45
%
50
%
65
%
60
%
70
%
50
%
40
%
60
%
30
%
20
%
10
%
FIGURE 5
Many fewer respondents report that the economy has a negative
impact on their companies’ corporate citizenship efforts
Health care and social assistance
Professional, scientific, and technical services
Manufacturing
Transportation and warehousing
Information
Finance and insurance
Accommodation and food services
Wholesale trade
Utilities*
Retail trade
* The utilities industry included mining in 2012.
2014
2012
state of corporate citizenship 2014
8
The multitude of factors that can aect the success
of corporate citizenship eorts is staggering. In the
past, certain factors—such as pressure to produce
short-term returns and the political environment—were
perceived to hinder success rates; however, in 2014, on
each dimension measured, the majority of executive
respondents report that each factor helped the success of
their corporate citizenship eorts (see Figure 6). Most
notably, global market competition and the pressure for
long-term returns are much more likely to help than in
the previous study. In 2012, 32% of executive respon-
dents reported that long-term pressures helped their
corporate citizenship eorts. That percentage almost
doubled to 62% today.
This shift suggests that companies that are
adopting a longer return horizon may be better
positioned to dierentiate themselves. Not only do
conventional investors look at ESG performance as a
proxy for good management, but we have also seen
significant growth in the numbers of ESG investors in
the United States.6 Socially responsible investing (SRI)
in the United States grew from $639 billion in 1995 to
$3.744 trillion in 2012.7 From 2009 to 2012, the value
of SRI assets increased 22%.8
In 2014, on each
dimension measured,
the majority of executive
respondents report
that each factor helped
the success of their
corporate citizenship
eorts.
50
%
40
%
60
%
30
%
20
%
10
%
0
%
FIGURE 6
Factors that help or hinder success of corporate citizenship 2014 Hinder 2012 Hinder 2014 Help 2012 Help
Executives in my company
Managers in my company
General public
U.S. economy
Nonmanagement employees
in my company (staff)
Pressure for long-term
financial performance
Global market competition
Media
U.S. political environment
Regulatory environment
Political environment
outside the U.S.
Pressure for short-term
financial performance
Chart note: For both years, respondents are U.S. executives who work for companies based in the U.S.
70
%
80
%
50
%
40
%
30
%
20
%
10
%
Hinder Help
boston college center for corporate citizenship carroll school of management 9
Integration of corporate citizenship
and business goals
Integration creates business value
Corporate citizenship eorts are most likely to be
successful when aligned with the needs and objectives
of the business, a finding reinforced by the 2014 State
of Corporate Citizenship survey, which found that—
when integrated with overall business strategy
corporate citizenship helps companies successfully
achieve business goals (see Figures 7-9).9 To day ’s
demanding business environment requires executives
to constantly balance and rebalance priorities. While all
of the listed business goals are considered important by
the majority of executive respondents, the highest
priority is placed on attracting and retaining custom-
ers, along with enhancing corporate reputation (see
Figure 7). While priorities have shifted over the years,
corporate reputation has consistently been a key driver
of corporate citizenship since the 2009 study.
Companies are more likely to report success with
achieving business goals when corporate citizenship is
integrated into business strategy (see Figure 8). While
the majority of executive respondents found this to be
true for every listed business goal, in some cases the
level of success more than doubles when corporate
citizenship is integrated. This important finding
indicates that corporate citizenship is starting to be
viewed as an important strategic lever for achieving
business objectives—such as enhancing corporate
reputation or attracting and retaining employees.
Today’s demanding
business environment
requires exe cutives to
constantly balance and
rebalance priorities.
At
tract new customers
Enhance
reputation
Im
prove customer retention
Im
prove ability to recruit employees
Im
prove risk management
De
velop innovative new
produ
cts and services
Im
prove ability to retain employees
Im
prove access to new markets
Se
cure a sustainable
supply chain
Re
duce waste in
business
operations
Re
duce employee health costs
At
tract new investors
70
%
60
%
90
%
FIGURE 7
Impor
tance of business goals
80
%
90
%
80
%
100
%
70
%
60
%
50
%
40
%
Corporate citizenship is integrated and reported success
with achieving business goal
Corporate citizenship is not integrated and reported success
with achieving business goal
30
%
20
%
Reduce employee health costs
Improve ability to retain employees
Improve access to new markets
Attract new investors
Reduce waste in
business operations
Develop innovative new
products and services
Improve customer retention
Improve risk management
Secure a sustainable supply chain
Enhance reputation
Attract new customers
Improve ability to
recruit employees
FIGURE 8
Reported success with achieving business goals
state of corporate citizenship 2014
10
FIGURE 9
Corporate citizenship contributes to business goals and how important business goals are to company success by industry
highest agreement
lowest agreement
Attract new
customers
Improve risk
management
Improve customer
retention
Enhance
reputation
Improve ability to
retain employees
Improve access to
new markets
Develop innovative new
products and services
Improve ability to
recruit employees
Reduce waste in
business operations
Attract new
investors
Secure a sustainable
supply chain
Reduce employee
health costs
Finance and insurance
Corporate citizenship contributes
Business goal is important
The areas highlighted in green show the correlation of where corporate citizenship
contributes most to the business goals most prioritized by executives. Not surprisingly,
the goals considered most important and the ways in which corporate citizenship
contributes vary across industries.
Attract new
customers
Improve risk
management
Reduce employee
health costs
Improve ability to
recruit employees
Develop innovative new
products and services
Enhance
reputation
Reduce waste in
business operations
Improve customer
retention
Improve ability to
retain employees
Attract new
investors
Secure a sustainable
supply chain
Improve access to
new markets
Professional, scientific, and
technical services
Corporate citizenship contributes
Business goal is important
Reduce employee
health costs
Improve customer
retention
Improve ability to
recruit employees
Secure a sustainable
supply chain
Reduce waste in
business operations
Improve ability to
retain employees
Enhance
reputation
Attract new
investors
Improve access to
new markets
Develop innovative new
products and services
Improve risk
management
Attract new
customers
Health care and
social assistance
Corporate citizenship contributes
Business goal is important
Improve ability to
recruit employees
Attract new
customers
Improve risk
management
Develop innovative new
products and services
Attract new
investors
Secure a sustainable
supply chain
Improve access to
new markets
Improve customer
retention
Reduce employee
health costs
Enhance
reputation
Reduce waste in
business operations
Improve ability to
retain employees
Information
Corporate citizenship contributes
Business goal is important
Attract new
customers
Secure a sustainable
supply chain
Enhance
reputation
Improve ability
to recruit employees
Improve access to
new markets
Attract new
investors
Reduce waste in
business operations
Develop innovative new
products and services
Improve customer
retention
Improve ability to
retain employees
Improve risk
management
Reduce employee
health costs
Utilities
Corporate citizenship contributes
Business goal is important
Secure a sustainable
supply chain
Develop innovative new
products and services
Enhance
reputation
Attract new
customers
Improve customer
retention
Improve ability to
recruit employees
Improve access to
new markets
Improve risk
management
Improve ability to
retain employees
Reduce employee
health costs
Reduce waste in
business operations
Attract new
investors
Manufacturing
Corporate citizenship contributes
Business goal is important
boston college center for corporate citizenship carroll school of management 11
The contrast illustrated in Figure 8 is clear: When
corporate citizenship is not integrated into business
strategy, eorts suer. In the majority of these cases,
executive respondents report that their companies do
not successfully achieve goals. Reducing employee
health costs, improving the ability to retain employees,
and improving access to new markets are the goals least
likely to be achieved—goals that more than 90% of
executive respondents report successfully achieving
with the integration of corporate citizenship.
The goals of companies shift along industry lines,
and corporate citizenship aects these goals dierently
as the challenges and opportunities unique to each
sector exert dierent pressures on each objective
(see Figure 9). For example, while attracting customers
is reported as the most important business goal for
many industries, it is understandably low on the list
for the health care and social assistance sector. For the
majority of industries, corporate citizenship aids the
eort in achieving the most important listed
business goal.
How corporate reputation increases value
Companies are increasingly paying attention to the
intangible value accrued through reputation.10 Along
with intellectual capital from top talent and individual
and corporate goodwill, corporate reputation is one of
the factors that make up a company’s intangible
assets—which account for as much as 80% of market
value (see Figure 10).11
High-performing companies know the important
role that corporate reputation can play in attracting and
retaining customers, employees, and investors.
Research has shown that companies that can maintain
or improve their reputation among multiple stakeholder
audiences are more attractive to investors and better
able to maintain or increase value during a crisis.12
Securing these benefits means investing in
corporate citizenship. Ninety-six percent of executive
respondents reported that their organizations success-
fully enhanced their reputation when corporate
citizenship was integrated, and that gives them a
competitive edge. According to the 2014 Harris Poll
Reputation QuotientTM (RQTM)—a study that engages
more than 18,000 members of the U.S. general public
to measure the reputations of the 60 most visible
companies in the United States—many are still
skeptical of corporate America (see Figure 11).13
Companies need to make serious eorts to elevate their
reputations in the eyes of the public, a mission that can
be more eectively achieved with the integration of
corporate citizenship.
of executive re spondents
reported that their
companies successfully
enhanced their reputation
when corporate citizenship
was integrated.
96%
$500
$600
$300
FIGURE 10
Market value of top global brands
Intangible and tangible value ($bn)
$400
90
%
80
%
100
%
70
%
60
%
50
%
40
%
30
%
20
%
33%
FIGURE 11
Overall reputation of corporate America
Excellent/very good Good Fair Poor Very poor/terrible Not sure
Intangible value Tangible value
$200
$0
$100
Chart note: Brands are among the top 20 of BrandZ’s Top 100 Most Valuable Global
Brands 2014. Retrieved from Millward Brown website, https://www.millwardbrown.com/
brandz/2014/Top100/Docs/2014_BrandZ_Top100_Chart.pdf
Source (for market market value of companies on June 30, 2014): Retrieved from ycharts.com
Source (for equity, net intangibles, and goodwill for tangible/intangible value calculations,
2nd quarter 2014 balance sheets [end of June 2014]): Symbol lookup (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/
10
%
0
%
}
}
38%
Source: The Nielsen Company. (2014, April). The Harris Poll 2014 RQ® Summary Report.
Retrieved from http://www.nielsen.com/content/corporate/us/en/insights/reports/
2014/the-reputations-of-the-most-visible-companies.html
state of corporate citizenship 2014
12
Encouraging wellness to cut costs
i OECD. (2014). OECD Health Statistics 2014: How does the United States compare? Paris: OECD Publishing.
ii The Kaiser Family Foundation and Health Research & Educational Trust. (2013). Employer-Sponsored Family Health Premiums Rise a Modest 4 Percent in 2013, National
Benchmark Employer Survey Finds [Press Release]. Retrieved from http://k.org/private-insurance/press-release/employer-sponsored-family-health-premiums-rise-a-modest-4-
percent-in-2013-national-benchmark-employer-survey-finds/
iii The Kaiser Family Foundation and Health Research & Educational Trust. (2013). Employer Health Benefi ts 2013 Annual Survey. Retrieved from http://k.org/report-
section/2013-summary-of-findings/
iv Har ter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., Asplund, J. W., Killham, E. A., & Agrawal, S. (2010). Causal Impact of Employee Work Perceptions on the Bottom Line of Organizations.
Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(4). 378 -389.
v The Kaiser Family Foundation and Health Research & Educational Trust . (2013). Employer Healt h Benefits 2013 Annual Survey.
vi Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (200 9, December 17). Chronic Diseases: The Power to Pre vent, The Call to Control: At A Glance 2009. Retr ieved from
http://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/resources/publications/aag/chronic.htm
vii Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2009).
employee well-being, which—beyond the direct benefit to the
employee—has been shown to increase engagement and productivity,
and provide a myriad of other benefits to employers and their
employees.iv
According to the 2013 Kaiser/HRET Survey of Employer-Sponsored
Health Benefits, the majority of companies that oer health benefits
also oer at least one wellness program to employees, and the
majority of employers (67%) believe that these programs are very or
somewhat eective in controlling health care costs.v
Some programs may go further than others by targeting the most
common, costly and preventable of all health problems: chronic
diseases.vi These illnesses account for more than 75% of all health care
costs, and aect nearly half of the U.S. adult population.vii Several
companies have extended what they have learned in their employee
programs to consumer initiatives.
Good corporate citizenship eorts work to protect and enhance the ESG
dimensions of business objectives—objectives that change over time in
response to social and regulatory pressures. Here is a deeper dive into an
emerging business objective with corporate citizenship ramifications.
The United States spends more on health care than any other
developed nation—nearly 17% of its Gross Domestic Product (see
Figure A)—and yet has some of the worst health outcomes.i
This disparity places a dicult burden on companies and aects
the well-being of the workforce. Since 2003, health care plan premiums
have increased by 80%—nearly 3x as fast as wages, which have
increased 31% on average, and more than 3x inflation (27%).ii Employee
contributions have increased by 89% (see Figure B), putting more
pressure on household incomes and aecting employee satisfaction
with wage increases.iii Many companies are proactively seeking to
reverse this trend by improving employee health. These eorts are
yielding dividends both by reducing health care costs and improving
1980
5%
10%
15%
20%
0%
1982 1984 19 86 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 United Kingdom
Turkey
Switzerland
Sweden
Spain
Slovenia
Slovak Republic
Portugal*
Poland
Norway
New Zealand*
Netherlands*
Mexico
Luxembourg
Korea
Japan
Italy
Israel
Ireland
Iceland
Hungary
Greece
Germany
France
Finland
Estonia
Denmark
Czech Republic
Chile
Canada
Belgium*
Austria
Australia
United States
Employee contribution ($)
Employer contribution ($)
2003 2013
80% total
premium
increase
89% employee
contribution
increase
FIGURE B
Average annual health insurance premiums for
family coverage: Employer and employee
contributions in 2003 compared to 2013
FIGURE A
Percent of GDP spent on health care
$6,657
$2,412
$11,786
$4,565
Source: The Kaiser Family Foundation and Health
Research & Educational Trust. (2013, August 20). 2013
Employer Health Benefits Survey. Exhibit A. Average
Annual Health Insurance Premiums and Worker
Contributions for Family Coverage, 2003-2013.
Retrieved from http://kff.org/report-sec-
tion/2013-summary-of-findings/
*Excluding investments
Source: OECD. (2014). OECD health statistics 2014. Retrieved October 21, 2014, from http://www.oecd.org/health/health-systems/
oecd-health-statistics-2014-frequently-requested-data.htm
boston college center for corporate citizenship carroll school of management 13
Competing for talent
i Rothwell, J. (2014). Still Searching: Job Vacancies and STEM skills. Brookings Institution. Retrieved from http://www.brookings.edu/research/interactives/2014/job-vacancies-
and-stem-skills#/M10420
Though there has been plenty of media attention on the unemployed
and underemployed, many technical and highly skilled jobs in the
United States remain unfilled due to a shortage of qualified applicants.i
Now, more than ever, many companies seek to increase employee
engagement as a means to help compete for and retain talent. Some
companies, like State Street Corporation, are innovating to address
this problem and improving their environmental profile in the process.
“At State Street, we are dedicated to providing comprehensive
financial services to institutional investors around the world and can ill
aord to lose top talent and institutional knowledge,” said Michael
Scannell, senior vice president, global human resources and corporate
citizenship at State Street. “So we oer corporate citizenship programs
to drive engagement and reduce turnover.”
State Street is a leader in thinking about the additional productivity
and engagement that can be achieved by oering employees flexibility.
Through State Street’s award-winning Flex Work program,
managers are empowered to proactively approach employees with five
flex options: flex time, compressed schedules, reduced hours, job
sharing, and flex place, a mobile option that allows employees to work
away from the oce 50% or more of the time. Recent employee
surveys have shown that employees identified to be eligible for the
program have a greater intent to stay with the company and demon-
strated greater discretionary eort.
“The success of our Flex Work program is also contributing to the
reduction of State Street’s carbon footprint,” said Peter DeBruin,
corporate environmental sustainability strategist at State Street.
“Flex place employees alone save approximately 190 thousand miles
of driving each week.”
The achievements of these employees are reinforced by State
Street’s Environmental Sustainability Committee, which is comprised
of executives from around the company, and through its Environmental
Management System (EMS). Since its launch in 2005, State Street has
met its goal for reducing fossil fuels burned and greenhouse gas
emissions by 2010 in Massachusetts by 5%, as well as its goal for
increasing paper recycling over the same period by 5%.
State Street also oers multiple ways for employees to express their
personal values at work. The company’s Global Outreach program
maximizes employee engagement by encouraging employees to
participate in charitable activities of interest to them. In 2013,
State Street volunteers and alumni contributed more than
87,000 hours to over 3,500 projects worldwide, saving charitable
partners $1.96 million.
By strategically focusing its corporate citizenship eorts on the
issues that matter most to employees, and by involving them ever y
step of the way, State Street holds on to the talent that drives its
business, while at the same time maximizing its contributions to the
environment and the communities it serves.
State Street Corporation provides flexible work arrangements to reduce energy consumption and attract the workforce of the future.
state of corporate citizenship 2014
14
Alignment of corporate citizenship
Creating business value
The majority of executive respondents across all
business types and industries believe that investing in
corporate citizenship results in increased financial
value and direct benefits to shareholders, and confirm
that all three ESG dimensions deliver value in the
short, medium, and long terms (see Figure 12).
The benefits of long-term investments are examined
more frequently today in the popular business press and
in academic research.14 As was the case in 2012,
environmental investments are reported most frequently
as returning value to shareholders in the long term,
though executive respondents report a sharp increase in
the short-term value return as well. This is followed
closely by governance investments, and finally by social
investments. While all investments are reported to
deliver long-term value, both social investments and
governance investments are believed to deliver modestly
greater value in the medium term.
Stakeholders in focus
Stakeholder groups have shifted in priority as busi-
nesses design their corporate citizenship programs.
While each of the stakeholder groups listed receives a
level of consideration from the majority of executive
respondents, some receive considerably more than
others (see Figures 13-15). In 2014, customers were the
priority audience for ESG eorts, followed closely by
employees (see Figure 13). The increased attention on
employees as an important stakeholder group—along
with the majority assessment of the current economy as
an opportunity—suggests that companies are in a more
competitive market for talent and that they may invest
more in ESG programs that engage employees more
deeply in order to dierentiate themselves to attract and
retain excellent talent.
Consistent with the 2012 study, supply chain
partners, government oces, the media, and NGOs are
the least frequently considered stakeholders; however,
Investing in corporate
citizenship results in
increased financial value
and direct benefits to
shareholders.
50
%
40
%
60
%
70
%
FIGURE 12A
Environmental investments deliver value to shareholders by return horizon
Return value to shareholders
in the long term (11 or more years)
Return value to shareholders in the medium
term (more than 3 years but less than 11 years)
Return value to shareholders
in the short term (3 or less years)
2014 2012
FIGURE 12B
Social investments deliver value to shareholders by return horizon
FIGURE 12C
Governance investments deliver value to shareholders by return horizon
50
%
40
%
60
%
70
%
Return value to shareholders
in the long term (11 or more years)
Return value to shareholders in the medium
term (more than 3 years but less than 11 years)
Return value to shareholders
in the short term (3 or less years)
50
%
40
%
60
%
70
%
Return value to shareholders
in the long term (11 or more years)
Return value to shareholders in the medium
term (more than 3 years but less than 11 years)
Return value to shareholders
in the short term (3 or less years)
2014 2012
2014 2012
50
%
60
%
90
%
100
%
FIGURE 13
Stakeholders are considered in developing corporate citizenship effor
ts
Customers
Employees
Supply chain partners
Government offices
Media
Nonprofits/non-governmental
organizations (NGOs)
70
%
80
%
2014 2012
boston college center for corporate citizenship carroll school of management 15
each group has seen gains in the current study,
suggesting that more companies are considering
stakeholder engagement as a priority. Supply chain
partners, in particular, are considered by 73% of
executive respondents in 2014, an increase of 15% over
the previous study. This increase suggests that recent
human rights and environmental disasters, and the
attendant media coverage, have made executives more
sensitive to the degree to which they can be held
responsible by customers and others for events that
happen anywhere in their value chain.15
Public-company executive respondents are signi-
cantly more likely to consider the media and govern-
ment than their private-company peers, potentially
suggesting a greater sensitivity to public opinion, media
coverage, and regulatory authority (see Figure 14).
As was the case in the 2012 study, the size and type
of firm influences stakeholder prioritization (see Figure
15). In the current study, consideration of supply chain
partners and the media increases among companies
73%
of executive re spondents
consider supply chain
partners while designing
corporate citizenship
programs.
FIGURE 14A (2014)
Stakeholders are considered in developing corporate citizenship efforts
by business and company type
Customers Employees Board and executive leadership Investors/shareholders Communities where business operates
General public
Supply chain partners
Government offices
Media
Nonprofits/NGOs
70%
60%
80%
100%
90%
B2B-B2C Public
Total
B2B Private
B2B Public
B2C Private
B2C Public
B2B-B2C Private
FIGURE 14B (2012)
Stakeholders are considered in developing corporate citizenship efforts
by business and company type
70%
60%
80%
100%
90%
B2B-B2C Public
Total
B2B Private
B2B Public
B2C Private
B2C Public
B2B-B2C Private
FIGURE 15A (2014)
Stakeholders are considered in developing corporate citizenship efforts
by revenue and operational scope
70%
60%
80%
100%
90%
Total
Less than $1 billion
$1 billion to less than $5 billion
$5 billion and over
Operating globally
Operating domestically
FIGURE 15B (2012)
Stakeholders are considered in developing corporate citizenship efforts
by revenue and operational scope
50%
70%
60%
80%
100%
90%
Total
Less than $1 billion
$1 billion to less than $5 billion
$5 billion and over
Operating globally
Operating domestically
50%
Companies of all types are paying more attention to a wider variety of stakeholder groups. Across the board, the gaps between those
stakeholders most considered and those considered the least is closing–especially for large global companies.
state of corporate citizenship 2014
16
with global operations, suggesting that large global
companies understand that it is no longer an option to
assume that brands will be held harmless by stake-
holders if one of their suppliers is not diligent about
protecting their workers or the environment.
On the whole, companies are considering these
stakeholders, as well as nonprofits/NGOs and govern-
ment oces, more than they were in 2012.
Priorities and contributions to
company success
The majority of executive respondents agree that
corporate citizenship dimensions are important and
contribute to company success (see Figures 16-18).
While the benefits of corporate citizenship are
consistently reported, proper prioritization is essential
to ensure that the sometimes limited resources achieve
the maximum business and social value. Research has
shown that corporate citizenship eorts are more
eective, and they are perceived to be more credible,
when there is a logical connection to the firm’s core
competence or operating context.16 This is reflected in
the dierences across industry sectors in the issues
and types of programs prioritized.
The majority of executive
respondents agree that
corporate citizenship
dimensions are important
and contribute to
company success.
Consumer data protection and privacy
Employee safety practices
Engagement with stakeholders
Programs to increase employee diversity
Reporting on environmental performance
Philanthropy/corporate giving
Employee volunteer programs
Recycling programs
Sustainable use of resources
Community economic development
Reporting on social performance
Pollution prevention practices
Development of environmentally friendly products
Engagement in political causes/campaigns
70
%
60
%
50
%
FIGURE 16
The percentage of executives who identify corporate citizenship dimensions as a top priorit
y
80
%
boston college center for corporate citizenship carroll school of management 17
Emerging priorities
Consumer data protection and privacy has emerged as
the leading corporate citizenship priority for com-
panies. A priority that was not on the radar during the
last study, this focus emerges as an issue of concern
that outranks all other ESG dimensions (see Figure 16).
Though this is clearly a topic that is managed by IT and
operations groups in companies, corporate citizenship
programs are enhancing the security measures being
implemented with consumer and employee education
programs—increasing awareness about best practices
and how individuals can best safeguard their own
personally identifiable data and that of their customers.
The importance of industry
The corporate citizenship priorities within industries
vary, as opportunities and risks vary across industry
lines (see Figure 17). Industries trusted with customer
data, such as finance and insurance, utilities, retail
trade, and wholesale trade, prioritize consumer data
protection and privacy, particularly in light of recent
newsworthy data breaches. Work that necessitates more
dangerous operating conditions—such as construction
and mining, and transportation and warehousing—
value employee safety practices above all else.
Business executives are
becoming more savvy
about linking corporate
citizenship to business
strateg y, and are
investing appropriately.
FIGURE 17
Prioritization of corporate citizenship dimensions within industries
Construction and mining
Accommodation and food services
Consumer data protection and privacy
Employee safety practices
Engagement with stakeholders
Programs to increase employee diversity
Reporting on environmental performance
Philanthropy/corporate giving
Employee volunteer programs
Recycling programs
Sustainable use of resources
Community economic development
Reporting on social performance
Pollution prevention practices
Development of environmentally friendly products
Engagement in political causes/campaigns
highest priority
lowest priority
Finance and insurance
Health care and social assistance
Information
Manufacturing
Professional, scientific,
and technical services
Retail trade
Transportation and warehousing
Utilities
Wholesale trade
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
30 40 50 60 7010 80 9020
Within each industry, executives were asked
their highest and lowest corporate
citizenship priorities. Issues that received
majority prioritization are the brightest
(orange), while those that were prioritized
by the fewest number of respondents are
darkest (green). In some industries,
certain issues were considered of
equal importance.
state of corporate citizenship 2014
18
Executives are increasing focus on managing risk in the digital
domain, where recent data breaches have been shown to present
significant reputational and financial risks to business.
One recent study of data breaches globally found that the
average estimated total cost of a breach over two years is approxi-
mately $5.85 million, a 15% increase from 2013.i This issue is of
particular concern to U.S. businesses, where breaches result
typically in the highest total cost and the greatest number of
exposed or compromised records per event.ii Breaches have cost
companies tens of billions of dollars.iii
While the majority of breaches originate from outside sources,
insider attacks are on the rise. A significant portion of incidents
where personal data is exposed come from internal errors as well,
suggesting that it will be increasingly important for companies to
communicate data protection policies and responsibilities to all
employees—and to provide mechanisms by which they can report
either suspected malicious acts or mistakes. For companies that
conduct a lot of their business online, consumer and employee
education about data protection is emerging as a significant
corporate citizenship investment.
In its 2012 report, “Protecting Consumer Privacy in an Era
of Rapid Change: Recommendations For Businesses and
Policymakers”, the Federal Trade Commission argued for a holistic
approach to consumer data protection and privacy, advising
organizations to adopt the following:
1 Privacy by Design—build in consumers’ privacy protections
at every stage in developing products.
2 Simplified Choice for Businesses and Consumers—give
consumers the option to decide what information is shared
about them, and with whom.
3 Greater Transparency disclose details about their collection
and use of consumers’ information, and provide consumers
access to the data collected about them.iv
The proactive education of consumers and employees about
how to best protect personal information is a key investment.
This is especially important when children and youth are involved
and many companies are investing in cyber safety programs for
young people. Educating an informed public will be necessary if
companies hope to successfully protect themselves, their
employees, and their customers. That’s why many companies are
including mandatory employee training and oering free consumer
education and guidance. Some companies are going as far as to
oer education programs to other organizations, taking what they
have learned to increase awareness of best practices and promote
correct behaviors.
Protecting stakeholders from the breach:
consumer data protection and privacy
i Ponemon Institute. (2014). Cost of Data Breach Study: Global Analy sis. Retrieved
from http://www-935.ibm.com/services/us/en/it-services/security-services/
cost-of-data- breach/
ii Ponemon Institute. (2014).
iii MSCI. (2014). ESG Issue Repor t: Privacy and D ata Security—Exploring the Data
Value Chain. Retrieved from http://www.msci.com/resources/research_papers/
executive_ summary_privac y_and_ data_security_-_exploring_the_data_value_
chain.html
iv Federal Trade Commission. (2012). Protecting Consumer Privacy in an Era of Rapid
Change: Recommendations for Businesses and Policymakers. Retrieved from http://
www.ftc.gov/reports/protecting-consumer-privacy-era-rapid-change-recommenda-
tions-businesses-policymakers
Contributing to success
The majority of executive respondents report that every
corporate citizenship dimension contributes to
company success (see Figure 18). Notably, those
dimensions that were reported to be the most priori-
tized are also those that are reported to contribute to
company success by the largest majority. This illustrates
that business executives are becoming more savvy
about linking corporate citizenship to business strategy,
and are investing appropriately.
Consum
er data
prote
ction and privacy
Engagement
with
st
akeholders
Empl
oyee safety practices
Programs
to increase
empl
oyee diversity
Su
stainable use of resources
Empl
oyee volunteer programs
Repo
rting on social performance
Engagement
in political
ca
uses/campaigns
Pollutio
n prevention practices
Communit
y economic
de
velopment
Philanthropy
/corporate giving
De
velopment of environmentally
friendly
products
Re
cycling programs
Repo
rting on environmental
pe
rformance
70
%
50
%
FIGURE 18
Corporate citizenship dimensions contribute to company success
80
%
60
%
boston college center for corporate citizenship carroll school of management 19
Prioritizing social investments
Executive and consumer perspectives on
social issues
Executive respondents are clear: Customers, more than
any other group, drive corporate citizenship decisions
(see Figure 13). The issues that customers care about
most should understandably drive corporate citizenship
commitments. Yet, in the current 2014 study, we find
that consumers and executive respondents diverge in
their perspectives on which issues should be prioritized
(Figures 19-22).
As part of this study, executive responses were
tracked to those outlined in Nielsen’s Global Survey of
Corporate Social Responsibility, which asks consumers
to report on the issues that they are most concerned
about. (All consumer data in this section is used with
permission from Nielsen.)
While the majority of executive respondents are
likely to confirm that they are responsible for issues
controlled within their oces—creating well-
compensated jobs, promoting racial, ethnic, and
cultural inclusiveness, encouraging gender equality—
consumers are more concerned with large-scale global
crises. Nearly 60% of consumers find increasing access
to clean water a cause of major concern, yet only
one-quarter of executives strongly agree that their
companies are responsible for addressing this issue (see
Figure 19). This disparity is similar to eradicating
extreme poverty and hunger, and combatting both com-
municable (e.g., HIV/AIDS) and noncommunicable
diseases. It is a gap that has widened since the 2012
study, when executive respondents saw business as
having a greater role in addressing these issues.
Nearly 60% of
consumers find
increasing access to clean
water a cause of major
concern, yet only
one-quarter of executives
strongly agree that their
companies are responsible
for addressing this issue.
FIGURE 19
Consumer causes of extreme concern compared to executive strong agreement on issues for which their companies should be held responsible
Global consumers Executives
Gender eq uality
Diversity and inclusion
Small business and entrepren eurship
Reduce digital divide
Access to cultural institution s
STEM education and training
Education
Environment al sustainability
Disaste r relief
Fight communicable disease
Fight noncommunicable dis
ease
Poverty and hunger
Access to clean water
60
%
50
%
40
%
30
%
20
%
Source (for consumer data): The Nielsen Global Survey of Corporate Social Responsibility, Q1 2014
25
%
35
%
45
%
55
%
15
%
state of corporate citizenship 2014
20
Delving into the divide
Executive and consumer perceptions are formed, in
part, by their respective cultural contexts. U.S.
executives in larger companies are most closely aligned
with the concerns of U.S. consumers, and are most
divergent from the concerns of Latin American
consumers—a population that reports the highest rate
of concern for all issues across the board (see Figure
20). This “expectations chasm,” which first emerged in
2012, is even more pronounced in the current study.
Across industries, executive respondents are more
likely to believe that their companies are responsible for
solving problems when they are related to their
business or operating contexts. For example, a majority
of health care and social assistance executive respon-
dents feel that their companies are responsible for
helping to combat noncommunicable diseases—as they
can oer valuable specialized expertise pertaining to
the issue (see Figure 21). Executive respondents in
Across industries,
executive respondents
are more likely to believe
that their companies are
responsible for solving
problems whe n they are
related to their business
or operating contexts.
FIGURE 20
U.S. executives strongly agree their companies should be held responsible for issues compared to causes of extreme concern for consumers
U.S. executives North America Asia Pacific Europe Latin America Middle East, Africa & Pakistan
Diversity and inclusion
Gender eq uality
Access to cultural institution s
Reduce digital divide
Small business and entrepren eurship
STEM education and training
Environmental sustainabilit y
Education
Disaste r relief
Fight communicable disease
Fight noncommunicable disease
Access to clean water
Poverty and hunger
70
%
60
%
50
%
40
%
30
%
80
%
85
%
25
%
75
%
65
%
55
%
45
%
35
%
Source (for consumer data): The Nielsen Global Survey of Corporate Social Responsibility, Q1 2014
20
%
boston college center for corporate citizenship carroll school of management 21
utilities feel most responsible for providing relief
during natural disasters, an understandable finding, as
utility employees operate as part of mutual assistance
crews and provide support to other regions following
crises. (In Figure 21, the brightest colors [orange] on the
heat map represent highest perceived importance and
the darkest [green], the lowest).
While the majority of executive respondents in
companies of all sizes report that companies are
responsible for supporting diversity and inclusion,
increasing access to technology, and ensuring environ-
mental stewardship, those in smaller companies are
much less likely to believe that companies should be
involved with the issues listed (see Figure 22).
Corporate citizenship
programs addressing
issues aligned with
stakeholder interests can
forge deeper connections
with their communities.
FIGURE 21
Executive agreement within industries on issues for which their companies should be held responsible
Create well-compensated jobs
Diversity and inclusion
Gender equality
Environmental sustainability
Improve STEM training and education
Increase access to higher education
Reduce digital divide
Improve K-12 education
Small business and entrepreneurship
Disaster relief
Access to clean water
Support youth programs
Fight noncommunicable disease
Access to cultural institutions
Fight communicable disease
Poverty and hunger
highest agreement
lowest agreement
Finance and insurance
Health care and social assistance
Information
Manufacturing
Professional, scientific,
and technical services
Retail trade
Transportation and warehousing
Utilities
Wholesale trade
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
30 40 50 60 7010 80 9020
state of corporate citizenship 2014
22
Bridging the gap
The dierences illuminated in these figures highlight
the value of engaging with stakeholders to help
determine what social issues a company should
address. A materiality assessment can help companies
determine what issues have the most significant impact
on their business and their stakeholders. Corporate
citizenship programs that address issues that align with
stakeholder interests and a company’s business
strategy, while also accounting for regional dierences,
can forge deeper connections with their communities
and customers and achieve maximum business and
social impact.17
FIGURE 22
Executive agreement on issues for which their companies should be held responsible
Companies > 1,000 employees Companies < 1,000 employees
Create well -compensated jobs
Diversity and inclusion
Gender eq uality
Small busine
ss and entrep reneurship
Reduce digital divide
Environmental sustainabilit y
In
crease
access to higher education
Support youth programs
Impro
ve ST
EM training and
education
Disaste r relief
Improve K-12 education
Access to cultural institution s
Fight noncommu
nicable dise ase
Access to clean water
Poverty and hunger
Fight comm
unicable disease
70
%
60
%
50
%
40
%
30
%
80
%
85
%
25
%
75
%
65
%
55
%
45
%
35
%
20
%
15
%
boston college center for corporate citizenship carroll school of management 23
Supporting small businesses to achieve the American Dream
When Jim Koch founded Samuel Adams in 1984, American craft beer
was virtually unheard of, and uncertainty around the viability of the
business model made it dicult for Koch to get loans to grow the
business. Even once Samuel Adams was o the ground and thriving,
there were still a multitude of basic business hurdles that Koch had to
face before his company could grow to where it is today—including
gaining distributors, hiring new employees, and managing the
financials. Today, Samuel Adams employs over 1,000 people and
brews around 3 million barrels of beer annually. Samuel Adams is one
of the most successful independent American Brewers, yet still
accounts for only 1% of the beer market.
The Small Business Administration reports that the approximately
23 million small businesses in the United States account for 63% of
the net new jobs over the past 10 years.i Because of these statistics,
much has been written about the promise of small business as the
engine of economic recover y, but only half of these organizations
survive for more than five years.ii Not surprisingly, supporting success
for small businesses is an issue that concerns the majority of large cap
business executives surveyed in the State of Corporate Citizenship.
In 2008, Samuel Adams launched a program designed to help
small business owners start and sustain their own food, beverage, and
craft brewing companies. Piloted locally in Boston before expanding
nationally in 2012, Samuel Adams’ Brewing the American Dream
program leverages the company’s unique expertise to help small
business owners overcome the two main challenges that Koch faced
when beginning operations in 1984: securing loans from traditional
lenders and the need for nuts-and-bolts business expertise and advice.
They approached a private, nonprofit microlending organization,
Accion, to facilitate loans that, when repaid, help to create more capital
for distribution to small businesses (currently the loan repayment rate
is over 98%, which is well above the national average). In addition to
access to capital, participating companies are given access to the
Samuel Adams employee network through seminars and speed
coaching events, during which employees— from marketing, pack-
aging, distribution, financial management, and other departments—
oer advice and expertise.
Since launching, the Brewing the American Dream program has
enabled more than 5,000 small business owners to access free
coaching, provided more than $3 million in loans, and helped create or
retain more than 2,000 jobs. In 2013, the company hosted 16 coaching
events—staed by 400 Samuel Adams employees and partners—in 12
cities across the country, drawing nearly 1,000 current and prospective
business owners.
“In addition to helping small businesses, the program helped
remind us of where we started,” said Koch. “Being able to give back
makes our employees feel good, and the program has helped everyone
at Samuel Adams remain close to our entrepreneurial roots. We’re
proud to make a meaningful impact based on our experiences.”
i Small Business Administration. (2014). Oce of Advocacy: Frequently Asked Questions. Retrieved from http://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/FAQ_March_2014_0.pdf
ii Small Business Administration. (2014).
Founder and Brewer Jim Koch with Samuel Adams Brewing the American
Dream program participants.
Small business owners in the Brewing the American Dream program
with their product.
state of corporate citizenship 2014
24
Breaking through to clean water
The 2014 State of Corporate Citizenship finds that executive respondents
don’t always prioritize the same corporate citizenship eor ts as the average
consumer. According to Nielsen’s corporate social responsibility survey,
consumers are most concerned with increasing access to clean water and
erasing poverty and hunger.
Through its Breakthroughs to World Challenges goal—part of the
company’s 2015 Sustainability Goals—The Dow Chemical Company is
working to achieve at least three breakthroughs that significantly improve the
world’s ability to solve the challenges of aordable and adequate food supply,
sustainable water supplies, decent housing, or improved personal health and
safety.
“A breakthrough,” explains Bo Miller, global director, corporate citizenship
at Dow, “is an innovation, whether in a product, technology, or business
model, that has the ability to scale to levels that will significantly impact the
quality of lives of people around the world.”
Because a breakthrough to a world challenge can take many forms, Dow
established basic screens to evaluate innovations along the way. These
screens are made up of five key areas, each of which is considered when
evaluating the impact of an innovation:
Alignment—The innovation aligns with one or more of the five key
categories of world challenges: energy and climate change, water, food,
housing, and health.
Significance—The innovation makes a positive impact today or in the near
future, and the impact must be measurable. The metrics can vary
depending on the type of innovation and the challenge addressed, but in
all cases the breakthrough must demonstrably improve quality of life for
millions of people.
Benefits—The benefits of implementing the innovation significantly
outweigh any potential challenges.
Life Cycle View—Each stage of the solution’s “life cycle”—from develop-
ment through manufacturing, distribution, use, and end life—is carefully
vetted in regard to raw materials, energy use, water use, hazard profile,
disposal, and other social and environmental considerations.
Transparency—The positives and the negatives of the innovation are
publicly disclosed and openly discussed with key stakeholders. Multiple
aspects of the innovation are candidly and transparently evaluated.
Dow announced in June 2012 that its Omega-9 Oils were the company’s
first breakthrough. Its second breakthrough—DOW FILMTEC™ ECO Reverse
Osmosis (RO) Elements—works to address the global water crisis. Dow
scientists developed a step change in polymer chemistry that surpassed three
decades of incremental improvements in water filtration technology to deliver
some of the most advanced water purification science available today. This
new solution has the potential to impact millions of lives by revolutionizing
water treatment and fights global water scarcity by helping deliver 40 percent
better purification with 30 percent less energy.
“As our society faces these increasingly complex challenges, Dow is proud
to be part of the solution—putting our science and technology exper tise to
work to deliver real, high-impact innovations in these essential areas for
society,” said Dow Corporate Vice President, EH&S and Sustainability
Neil Hawkins.
*2030 Water Resources Group
**The World Business Council for Sus tainable Development
***Individual element’s lifetime calculated to be 5 years
boston college center for corporate citizenship carroll school of management 25
Commitment to corporate citizenship
The long-term view
Companies that invest in corporate citizenship over the
long term report success in achieving their business
goals in larger numbers (see Figure 23), consistent with
2012 findings. The sharpest gains are achieved when
companies commit to programs more than a year,
though commitments of four or more years continue to
see steady increases. Companies with a t ypical duration
of at least four years to a corporate citizenship eort are
3.9x more likely to report success with reducing health
care costs, and 3.6x more likely to report success with
reducing waste from business operations than those
companies that typically commit to an eort for less
than one year.
The success of long-term programs reflects the very
nature of corporate citizenship programs—eorts that
the majority of executive respondents believe are
helped by pressures to produce long-term returns. The
goals of corporate citizenship, such as ensuring
environmental sustainability, and programs to promote
access to education and build a well-prepared and
engaged workforce, are long-term investments. The
power of a long-term approach is confirmed by
executive respondents—93% of whom report success
in achieving business goals when corporate citizenship
eorts are supported for four years or more.
FIGURE 23A
Typical duration of commitment to a specific corporate citizenship effort compared with
percentages of reported success with business goals
Attract new customers Improve customer retention
Enhance reputation Develop innovative new products and services
Improve access to new markets Improve risk management
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
80%
100%
90%
Less than 1 year*
4 or more years
1 year to less than 4 years
FIGURE 23B
Typical duration of commitment to a specific corporate citizenship effort compared with
percentages of reported success with business goals
Reduce waste in business operations Improve ability to retain employees
Improve ability to recruit employees Reduce employee health costs
Secure a sustainable supply chain Attract new investors
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
80%
100%
90%
Less than 1 year*
4 or more years
1 year to less than 4 years
* Companies with a typical duration of less than one year includes small companies (fewer than 1,000 employees) in order to have enough respondents for the analysis.
Companies that inves t in
corporate citizenship over
the long term report
success in achieving their
business goals in larger
numbers.
state of corporate citizenship 2014
26
“Enhanced focus on environmental/pollution
programs—par ticularly at manufacturing
facilities in developing nations. Ongoing
diversity initiatives will continue and realize an
impact as new hiring will increase with
anticipated market growth. Ability to
contribute to local educational initiatives will
increase and foster long-term impact.”
Executives in their own
words on what corporate
citizenship will look like
at their companie s five
years from now:
“Unless profits increase, involvement will
continue to decrease. Involvement sta will
be cut before core business area sta will
be cut.”
“It will continue to mature
and be more integrated
into the culture.”
“It will become a much more
important aspect of who we
are. I suspect both our
customers and shareholders
will lead this eort.”
Corporate citizenship dimensions:
past and future
The development of corporate citizenship, just like any
aspect of business, is dependent on the demands and
pressures of stakeholders, recent events, and the
current market environment. These factors aect
corporate citizenship strategy, determining which
issues are emphasized and how resources are allocated.
While the priorities most likely to contribute to
corporate citizenship success have not much changed
in the past three years—and are not expected to—there
is an increased focus on environmental investments
(see Figure 24). Much like in 2012, eorts to use
resources sustainably and reduce waste and pollution
are expected to gain in importance over the next three
years.
FIGURE 24
Ant
icipated change in the importance of
dimensions
to corporate citizenship success
Chart note: The positive and negative numbers represent the change in position for the corporate citizenship dimensions from 2009 to 2017.
+2
-1
+5
+3
-1
+4
+2
+3
-7
–4
–6
0
0
2009 2011 2015 2017
1 Engagement with stakeholders
2 Philanthropy/corporate giving
3 Employee concerns
4 Diversity among employees and supply partners
5 Employee volunteer programs
6 Community economic development
7 Recycling programs
8 Sustainability
9 Reporting on social and environmental performance
10 Environmental protection
11 Development of environmentally friendly products
12 Engagement in political causes/campaigns
boston college center for corporate citizenship carroll school of management 27
“In five years, I would expect our
eorts to be much more organized
and focused vs. the current start-up
culture. Currently we are tasked
with building value, attracting
investors and clients. That focus can
be easier placed on corporate
citizenship once the corporation is
more well-established.
“Some of our commitments will
never change (promises to
diversity, sustainability, pollution
control, recycling); however, I am
hopeful that if our fortunes
improve with the overall
economy that we may begin to
contribute more to the programs
in our community which matter
(such as local educational and
healthcare eorts).
“Taking on more responsibility for the
products you deliver around the world.
Data protection and security will be critical.”
“It is something we strive to improve every year. We
are seeking to get more involved in community
development and community engagement through
investment and employee volunteer programs, but
most of our corporate citizenship focus is on
employee acquisition, development, and retention.”
Consumer data protection and privacy, a recently
added corporate citizenship dimension, has quickly
become one of the most prioritized, a trend that is
projected to only increase in the next three years (see
Figure 25). Meanwhile, engagement in political causes/
campaigns has historically been the least prioritized,
and is expected to remain so in the future.
Companies have realized the benefits of corporate
citizenship, and plan to increase resources in every
listed ESG dimension in the next three years, though
the most significant gains are understandably expected
in the most prioritized dimensions (see Figure 26).
This is significantly dierent from the previous study.
In 2012, the majority of executive respondents only
expected to see resources increase for one dimension—
recycling programs.
-20%0%20%40%60 %80 %
Consumer data protection and privacy
Employee safety practices
Engagement with stakeholders
Recycling programs
Sustainable use of resources
Programs to increase employee diversity
Pollution prevention practices
Development of
environmentally friendly products
Employee volunteer programs
Community economic development
Reporting on social performance
Philanthropy/corporate giving
Reporting on environmental
performance
Engagement in political
causes/campaigns
FIGURE 26
Resource commitment to corporate citizenship dimensions 3 years from now
Decrease Increase
Consum
er data protection
and pr
ivacy
Empl
oyee safety practices
Engagement
with stakeholders
Su
stainable use of resources
Re
cycling programs
Programs
to increase
empl
oyee diversity
Pollutio
n prevention practices
Repo
rting on social performance
Repo
rting on environmental
pe
rformance
De
velopment of environmentally
friendly
products
Philanthropy
/corporate giving
Communit
y economic
de
velopment
Empl
oyee volunteer programs
Engagement
in political
ca
uses/campaigns
70%
60%
FIGURE 25
Anticipated change in impor
tance of dimensions to corporate
citizenship success 3 years from now
80%
-200 20 40 60 80 100
100%
state of corporate citizenship 2014
28
Cutting back on carbon, mile by mile
As the State of Corporate Citizenship indicates, long-term corporate
citizenship investments are more likely to achieve success, a finding
that UPS clearly illustrates through its global greenhouse reduction
strategy. As the world’s largest package delivery company, UPS uses
substantial amounts of energy to provide transportation and logistics
services that facilitate trade and enhance global prosperity. The
company is well aware of the environmental challenges facing society,
and is committed to finding more and better solutions wherever
possible.
UPS has been working hard for years to reduce its environmental
impacts and has achieved impressive results. In 2013, the company
reached its 2016 goal of reducing carbon intensity by 10 percent three
years early. Now, UPS has set a new goal to achieve a 20 percent
reduction in carbon intensity from transpor tation by 2020, all while
delivering even more goods.
“As a global logistics company dependent on vehicles and fuel to
move nearly 17 million packages and documents a day, sustainability
and growth are inextricably linked,” said Rhonda Clark, chief sustain-
ability ocer at UPS. “Our ability to grow our global shipping volumes
and reduce total carbon emissions should be a signal to business that
it is possible to do more for the environment while also serving more
customers and adding more value.”
UPS’s continual pursuit of innovation is an important part of its
carbon reduction strategy. In 2013, the company introduced the
On-Road Integrated Optimization and Navigation System (ORION),
which uses proprietary technolog y to analyze and optimize a driver’s
delivery route for the day, thereby avoiding fuel consumption. By
minimizing idling time and left-hand turns, and rerouting drivers in
real-time based on unexpected events, ORION can help UPS save
more than 1.5 million gallons of fuel each year.
In addition to improving route eciency, UPS runs a “rolling
laboratory” of nearly 3,700 alternative fuel and advanced technology
vehicles to see how they perform in actual operating conditions. These
eorts are paying o: Since 2000, this fleet has logged more than 350
million miles, helping UPS avoid 34.5 million gallons of conventional
gasoline and diesel. UPS aims to drive 1 billion miles in this alternative
fuel and advanced technology fleet by the end of 2017.
UPS also extends its focus on innovation and eciency to
customers, oering solutions to help them measure, mitigate, and
manage their climate impacts, including:
Carbon Impact Analysis—UPS measures the carbon emissions
that arise from customers’ shipping activity, provides detailed
reports by mode and scope, and advises on ways to reduce the
climate impact.
UPS Carbon Neutral Shipping—Through UPS carbon neutral
shipping, customers can mitigate the carbon impact of any
shipment. They pay a small fee, which UPS uses to support oset
projects—such as reforestation or renewable energy—around the
world.
UPS My Choice® and UPS Smart Pickup®These online services
let customers and consumers adjust delivery and pickup dates or
locations to be more convenient. They get their packages when and
where they want them, and UPS avoids unnecessary miles of
driving—and greenhouse gases—associated with unsuccessful
delivery attempts.
Now, as one of the first U.S. companies to adopt the Global
Reporting Initiative’s new G4 guidelines, UPS showcases its success
in the ESG arena as transparently and comprehensively as possible
through its 2013 Sustainability Report.
An alternative fuel vehicle deployed in teh UPS fleet.
boston college center for corporate citizenship carroll school of management 29
Conclusion
The global economy is growing, but our global operating environment will
continue to present challenges and opportunities that inevitably arise with the
increased levels of complexity and competition that occur in a global economy.
In the U.S. market alone, business is being asked to help address a widening
income gap that jeopardizes economic stability and societal health; a surge of
data breaches that compromise privacy, security, and economic well-being;
and stressed environmental resources that impinge upon supply chains and
threaten ecosystems.
In the 2014 State of Corporate Citizenship survey, executive respondents have
demonstrated that they are confronting these challenges, in part, by thoughtfully
integrating corporate citizenship into business strategy. The majority report that
corporate citizenship helps their companies meet business goals and boost
performance, and that the ESG dimensions of business deliver long-term value to
shareholders. Executive respondents have confirmed the value of corporate
citizenship, and are prepared to invest further to reap even more impressive
results. When asked about future levels of investment, executive respondents
predict increased resources in every listed ESG dimension in the next three years.
Companies are prepared to increase investment in corporate citizenship, but there
is a significant gap between the issues that concern consumers the most and
those for which executives feel businesses are responsible. By more closely
aligning their corporate citizenship strategies to the expectations of consumers,
businesses may achieve even greater success than the impressive results illustra-
ted in this study—achieving greater growth and a more sustainable future.
state of corporate citizenship 2014
30
Profile of companies surveyed and methodology
> ½
HIGHLIGHTS
In both 2012 and 2014,
manufacturing is the
largest industry
Over one-half are
publicly traded, for-profit
companies
Almost half of the
companies are both
B2B and B2C
46%
25%
29%
B2B and B2C
B2B only
B2C only
25
%
20
%
30
%
35
%
15
%
10
%
5
%
Manufacturing
Finance and insurance
Health care and social assistance
Professional, scientific,
and technical services
Utilities*
Retail trade
Information
Transportation and warehousing
Construction and mining*
Wholesale trade
Accommodation and
food services
Waste and facilities management,
holding companies
Arts, entertainment, and recreation
Other services
(except Public Administration)
Industry
2014 2012
0
%
Note: Industries based on North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)
*Mining is included in the utilities industry in 2012 instead of construction.
0
%
0
%
0
%
B2B and B2C Public
B2B and B2C Private
B2B Private
B2C Public
B2B Public
B2C Private
Company and business type
2014 2012
25
%
20
%
30
%
15
%
10
%
5
%
0
%
Company type
2014
Publicly traded
for-profit company
Private for-profit
company
2012
Publicly traded
for-profit company
Private for-profit
company
Business type
2014
Both B2B and B2C
B2B
B2C
2012
Both B2B and B2C
B2B
B2C
Annual revenue change from prior year
2014
Decreased by 10%
or more
Decreased by 1-9%
Remained about the
same
Increased by 1-9%
Increased by 10% or more
2012
Decreased by 10%
or more
Decreased by 1-9%
Remained about the
same
Increased by 1-9%
Increased by 10% or more
Company revenue for prior fiscal year
2014
< $1 billion
$1 billion to < $5 billion
> $5 billion
2012
< $1 billion
$1 billion to < $5 billion
> $5 billion
Companies are reporting
increased revenue
Attract new customers
Reduce employee
health costs
Reduce waste in
business operations
Improve ability to
recruit employees
Improve risk management
Improve ability to
retain employees
Improve access to
new markets
Development of innovative
new products and services
Improve customer retention
Enhance reputation
Revenue breakdown between the years is almost identical
Over one-half are publicly traded, for-profit companies
Almost half of the companies are both B2B and B2C
Data in figures and
throughout the text refers
to executive respondents
from companies with at
least 1,000 employees,
unless other wise noted by
the symbol. Figures that
include a symbol are
based on data from all
respondents (executives
from companies with fewer
than 1,000 and 1,000 or
more employees).
boston college center for corporate citizenship carroll school of management 31
Criteria
To participate in the study, survey respondents met the following
criteria:
Work for a for-profit private or publicly traded company
Hold a position of senior executive level status or higher (at least
within two levels of the CEO/President)
Are familiar with their company’s corporate citizenship eorts
Complete a minimum of 90% of the survey
Quotas were used for the study based on location of company
headquarters, company operations, revenue, industry, business type,
and employee size. The industries provided in the survey responses
were cross-referenced with North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) codes. Revenue data was also cross-referenced with
the LexisNexis Academic database and other online sources for
company information.
The executive perspective on social issues is compared to the
consumer perspective through data provided by Nielsen from their
2014 Global Survey of Corporate Social Responsibility. In 2012, Nielsen
also provided data from their Global Survey of Corporate Citizenship
in order to provide a direct comparison between executives’ and
consumers’ views on company responsibility for social issues.
Methodology
Survey
752 executive respondents
Mostly U.S.-based medium
and large companies
Conducted May 30, 2014
– June 23, 2014
The 2014 survey used an
e-Rewards Business Panel,
a global panel of business
executives accessed through
Research Now
2012 (survey was adminis-
tered in November/December
2011), 2009, and 2007 also
used an e-Rewards Business
Panel
History
The study has been conducted
since 2003
Sixth study to explore the
attitudes and commitments
of business executives toward
corporate citizenship
First to include business
executives from outside
the United States
The majority of executives in
the survey work for com-
panies with global operations
2014
Region where respondents are based
90
%
United States
5
%
Cananda
4
%
Global
Domestic
(headquarters country only)
Company operations
2014 2012
50%
40%60%
30%
20%
10%
0%70%80%
Employee size
All other countries: 1%
Fewer than 1,ooo
employees
More than 1,ooo
employees
100,000 or more
75,000 to 99,999
50,000 to 74,999
25,000 to 49,999
10,000 to 24,999
7,500 to 9,999
5,000 to 7,499
2,500 to 4,999
1,000 to 2,499
state of corporate citizenship 2014
32
References
1 OECD. (2014). OECD Economic Outlook, Vol. 2014/1.
Paris: OECD Publishing.
2 OECD. (2014). Shifting Gear: Policy Challenges for the
next 50 Years (OECD Economics Department Policy
Notes, No. 24). Paris: OECD Publishing.
3 Executive Oce of the President. (2014). A Year of
Action: Progress Report on Raising the Minimum
Wage. Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/
sites/de fau lt/files/docs/minimum _wage _report2 .
pdf
4 OECD. (2014). Shifting Gear.
5 The World Bank. (2014, August 11). Why Business
Leaders Support a Price on Carbon. The World Bank.
Retrieved from http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/
feature/2014/08/11/business-leaders-support-
carbon-pricing.
6 US SIF. (2012). Report on Sustainable and Responsi-
ble Investing Trends in the United States 2012.
Retrieved from http://www.ussif.org/content.
asp?contentid=82
7 US SIF. (2012).
8 US SIF. (2012).
9 Tang, Z., Hull, C.E., & Rothenberg, S. (2012). How
Corporate Social Responsibility Engagement
Strategy Moderates the CSR–Financial Performance
Relationship. Journal of Management Studies, 49(7),
1274-1303 .
10 Iwu-Egwuonwu, R. C. (2011). Corporate Reputation
& Firm Performance: Empirical Literature Evidence.
International Journal of Business and Management,
6(4), 197 –206.
11 Ocean Tomo. (2014, November 7). Intangible Asset
Market Value. Retrieved from Ocean Tomo:
http://www.oceantomo.com/productsandservices/
investments/intangible-market-value
12 Raithel, S., Wilczynksi, P., Schloderer, M. P., &
Schwaiger M. (2010). The Value-Relevance of Corpo-
rate Reputation During the Financial Crisis. Journal
of Product and Brand Management, 19(6), 389–400.
13 The Nielsen Company. (2014). The Harris Poll 2014
RQ® Summary Report. Retrieved from http://www.
nielsen.com/content/corporate/us/en/insights/
reports/2014/the-reputations-of-the-most-visi-
ble-companies.html
14 Roberge, M. W., Flaherty, J. C., Almeida, R. M., &
Boyd, A. C. (2014). White Paper Series: Lengthening
the Investment Time Horizon. MFS. Retrieved from
https://www.mfs.com/subs/home-microsite/
pdf/14_05_wp_lengthening_the_investment_
time_horizon.pdf
15 Hartmann, J.; Moeller, S. (2014). Chain liability in
multitier supply chains? Responsibility attributions
for unsustainable supplier behavior. Journal of
Operations Management, 32(5), 281–294.
16 Ellen, P. S., Webb, D. J., & Lois, M. (2006). Building
Corporate Associations: Consumer Attributions for
Corporate Socially Responsible Programs. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 147-157.
17 Ellen, et al. (2006).
boston college center for corporate citizenship carroll school of management 33
KNOW MORE.
DO MORE.
ACHIEVE MORE.
Access to Research
The Center conducts ongoing research, which is available to
members through weekly, monthly, and biannual publications.
We also scan the universe of research publications in the
management and social sciences disciplines related to
corporate citizenship and prepare summaries and
briefings for members.
ccc.bc.edu
Based in the Carroll School of Management, the Boston College
Center for Corporate Citizenship combines the most valuable aspects
of a professional community and the resources of a leading academic
institution for our members. We integrate the perspectives and
experience of some of the leading corporate citizenship professionals
in the field today with management best practices, helping you align
your corporate citizenship objectives and business goals. Center
resources support positive outcomes for your functional area, your
organization as a whole, and for you as a leader.
140 Commonwealth Ave., Chestnut Hill, MA 02467 | : 617 552 4545 : 617 552 8499 : ccc@bc.edu
KNOW MORE.
DO MORE.
ACHIEVE MORE.
ccc.bc.edu
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
When it becomes publicly known that products are associated with suppliers that engage in unsustainable behaviors, consumers protest, as Nestlé, Zara, and Kimberly Clark, among others, have learned. The phenomenon by which consumers hold firms responsible for the unsustainable behavior of their upstream partners suggests the notion of “chain liability.” This study aims to generate insights into the antecedents and consequences of such consumer responsibility attributions. Using data from four vignette-based survey experiments, the authors find that the chain liability effect increases if an environmental degradation incident (1) results from supplier behavior rather than force majeure, (2) results from a company decision rather than the decision of an individual employee, and (3) is more severe. Responsibility attributions do not differ with varying organizational distance from the supplier, firm size, strategic importance of the supplied product, or the existence of environmental management systems. The chain liability effect also creates strong risks for the focal firm; higher responsibility attributions increase consumers’ anger and propensity to boycott. Therefore, firms should work to ensure sustainable behavior throughout the supply chain, to protect them from chain liability.
Article
Full-text available
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is often used as a key criterion in gauging corporate reputation. This research examined the influence of consumers’ attributions on corporate outcomes in response to CSR. Researchers and managers have considered consumers’ beliefs about CSR initiatives to be simplistic, serving either economic ends or reflecting sincere social concerns. The results of two studies established that consumers’ attributions were more complex than traditionally viewed, mirroring many of the motives ascribed to companies by managers and researchers. Rather than viewing corporate efforts along a self- or other-centered continuum, consumers differentiated four types of motives: self-centered motives that are strategic and egoistic and other-centered motives that are values driven and stakeholder driven. Consumers responded most positively to CSR efforts they judged as values driven and strategic while responding negatively to efforts perceived as stakeholder driven or egoistic. Attributions were shown to affect purchase intent as well as mediate the structure of an offer.
Article
Full-text available
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the value-relevance of corporate reputation during times of crisis. The paper seeks to extend the view beyond the traditional focus on the cognitive component of reputation, shed light on its affective component, and integrate the perceptions of different stakeholder groups. Design/methodology/approach – The paper uses two large-scale surveys, one from before and one from after the financial crisis year of 2008, to ascertain the reputation evaluations of the largest publicly listed corporations in Germany. The paper employs a model augmented with standard accounting variables (i.e. sales, return on assets, etc.) to analyse the link between corporate reputation as noted by different stakeholder groups and future firm value. Findings – Even though corporations are not able to elude the overall negative impact of an economic crisis, the magnitude of influence depends on the individual firm dynamics as related to the firm's reputation. In particular, firm value dynamics are significantly associated with a reputation's affective component as perceived by the general public and its cognitive component as perceived by opinion leaders. Research limitations/implications – The paper analyses only very large corporations in Germany over a limited period of time. Practical implications – Managers cannot influence the course of a trans-national crisis, but they can immunise their company against its impacts by managing financial and non-financial drivers of firm reputation within the various stakeholder groups. Originality/value – The paper extends previous research on the value-relevance of corporate reputation by exploring the roles of different stakeholder groups' perceptions of the affective and cognitive component of reputation.
Article
We propose that firm profits are shaped by how firms engage in corporate social responsibility. Recent research on the corporate social responsibility (CSR)–corporate financial performance (CFP) relationship proposes a variety of contextual and organizational factors to create a more robust link. However, few of these studies explore the role of the CSR engagement strategy. Drawing on absorptive capacity theory and related perspectives such as time compression diseconomies, asset mass efficiencies, and path dependence theory, we argue that when a firm engages in CSR slowly and consistently, focuses on related CSR dimensions, and starts with internal dimensions of CSR, CFP will be enhanced. With longitudinal data collected from 130 firms from 1995 to 2007, we find that firms benefit more when they adopt a CSR engagement strategy that is consistent, involves related dimensions of CSR, and begins with aspects of CSR that are more internal to the firm. The pace of the CSR engagement strategy, however, does not moderate the CSR–CFP relationship. This study helps fill the gap in CSR research by showing that, regardless of contextual factors, a firm can choose the proper strategy to enhance the financial benefits of the CSR engagement.
Article
For ages, the view that corporate reputation positively impacts on firm performance has been documented; even accounting literature backs the notion that corporate reputation causes an enormous amount of wealth encapsulated in what is called goodwill, while some conventional wisdom assert that the reputation which organizations orchestrate for themselves do cause sustainable profits. These views have attracted quite a lot of scholars to structure research in so many areas of corporate reputation, and the body of knowledge on this subject is indeed not only increasing but deepening also. Reputation is an intangible asset and intangible assets are now increasingly seen as drivers of sustainable competitive business and corporate advantages. Thus, intangible assets like reputation are increasingly researched as sources of sustainable advantages. Research reveals that today what is usually called brand equity or corporate equity is actually determined by corporate reputation. Although reputation may be seen to arise as an output of different activities in the professions, the reputation an organization enjoys is actually constructed by the publics of that organization on the basis of information about the organization’s relative position to other organizations in the industry. It can arise out of consumers’ satisfying experience with the company’s products hence it can be inherited from an organization’s past actions. This work is a review of empirical studies on corporate reputation with emphasis on how it can help organizations achieve strong competitive advantage, enhance stock market performance as well as performance values on other measures. This work reveals that cultivating a strong reputation is a necessary foundation for today’s firms that intend to beat the competition, enhance their market outlook and financial performance as well as sustained existence. Corporate reputation is however also revealed to be a logical outcome of the quality of corporate governance operated in an organization. It is a critical resource, and indeed a pillar, upon which the quality of an organization’s future can be predicated. The paper concludes that the best material wisdom in today’s corporate and political spheres is the wisdom to have a good reputation because it pays to have a very good positive image.
Report on Sustainable and Responsible Investing Trends in the United States 2012 Retrieved from http
  • Us Sif
US SIF. (2012). Report on Sustainable and Responsible Investing Trends in the United States 2012. Retrieved from http://www.ussif.org/content. asp?contentid=82 7 US SIF. (2012).
Intangible Asset Market Value Retrieved from Ocean Tomo: http://www.oceantomo.com/productsandservices/ investments/intangible-market-value 12 The Value-Relevance of Corporate Reputation During the Financial Crisis
  • Ocean Tomo
Ocean Tomo. (2014, November 7). Intangible Asset Market Value. Retrieved from Ocean Tomo: http://www.oceantomo.com/productsandservices/ investments/intangible-market-value 12 Raithel, S., Wilczynksi, P., Schloderer, M. P., & Schwaiger M. (2010). The Value-Relevance of Corporate Reputation During the Financial Crisis. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 19(6), 389–400.
A Year of Action: Progress Report on Raising the Minimum Wage
Executive Office of the President. (2014). A Year of Action: Progress Report on Raising the Minimum Wage. Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/ sites/default/files/docs/minimum_wage_report2. pdf 4 OECD. (2014). Shifting Gear.
Intangible Asset Market Value
  • Ocean Tomo
Ocean Tomo. (2014, November 7). Intangible Asset Market Value. Retrieved from Ocean Tomo: http://www.oceantomo.com/productsandservices/ investments/intangible-market-value