This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Greening, D. W. Articles by Turban, D. B. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Corporate Social Performance As a Competitive Advantage in Attracting a Quality Workforce

Daniel B. Turban

University of Missouri

Several researchers have suggested that a talented, quality workforce will become a more important source of competitive advantage for firms in the future. Drawing on social identity theory and signaling theory, the authors hypothesize that firms can use their corporate social performance (CSP) activities to attract job applicants. Specifically, signaling theory suggests that a firm’s CSP sends signals to prospective job applicants about what it would be like to work for a firm. Social identity theory suggests that job applicants have higher self-images whenworking for socially responsive firms over their less responsive counterparts. The authors conducted an experiment in which they manipulated CSP and found that prospective job applicants are more likely to pursue jobs from socially responsible firms than from firms with poor social performance reputations. The implications of these findings for academicians and practitioners alike are discussed.

Business & Society, Vol. 39, No. 3, 254-280 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/000765030003900302


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. T. Peterson and M. Jun Perceptions on Social Responsibility: The Entrepreneurial Vision Business Society, September 1, 2009; 48(3): 385 - 405. [Abstract] [PDF]

				N. A. Dentchev Corporate Social Performance: Business Rationale, Competitiveness Threats, and Management Challenges Business Society, March 1, 2007; 46(1): 104 - 116. [PDF]

				M. Orlitzky, D. L. Swanson, and L.-K. Quartermaine Normative Myopia, Executives' Personality, and Preference for Pay Dispersion: Toward Implications for Corporate Social Performance Business Society, June 1, 2006; 45(2): 149 - 177. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. A. Bernardi, S. M. Bosco, and K. M. Vassill Does Female Representation on Boards of Directors Associate With Fortune's "100 Best Companies to Work For" List? Business Society, June 1, 2006; 45(2): 235 - 248. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Sen, C. B. Bhattacharya, and D. Korschun The Role of Corporate Social Responsibility in Strengthening Multiple Stakeholder Relationships: A Field Experiment Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, April 1, 2006; 34(2): 158 - 166. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. T. Jackson Breaking Down the Barriers: Bringing Initiatives and Reality into Business Ethics Education Journal of Management Education, February 1, 2006; 30(1): 65 - 89. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. K. Peterson The Relationship between Perceptions of Corporate Citizenship and Organizational Commitment Business Society, September 1, 2004; 43(3): 296 - 319. [Abstract] [PDF]

				W. J. Smith, R. E. Wokutch, K. V. Harrington, and B. S. Dennis Organizational Attractiveness and Corporate Social Orientation: Do Our Values Influence Our Preference for Affirmative Action and Managing Diversity? Business Society, March 1, 2004; 43(1): 69 - 96. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Orlitzky, F. L. Schmidt, and S. L. Rynes Corporate Social and Financial Performance: A Meta-Analysis Organization Studies, March 1, 2003; 24(3): 403 - 441. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. B. Backhaus, B. A. Stone, and K. Heiner Exploringthe Relationship Between Corporate Social Performance and Employer Attractiveness Business Society, September 1, 2002; 41(3): 292 - 318. [Abstract] [PDF]