Business & Society

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by De Bakker, F. G. A.
Right arrow Articles by Den Hond, F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Business & Society, Vol. 44, No. 3, 283-317 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/0007650305278086

A Bibliometric Analysis of 30 Years of Research and Theory on Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Social Performance

Frank G. A. De Bakker

Peter Groenewegen

Frank Den Hond

Vrije Universiteit

Social responsibilities of businesses and their managers have been discussed since the 1950s. Yet no consensus about progress has been achieved in the corporate social responsibility/corporate social performance literature. In this article, we seek to analyze three views on this literature. One view is that development occurred from conceptual vagueness, through clarification of central constructs and their relationships, to the testing of theory—a process supported by increased sophistication in research methods. In contrast, other authors claim that hardly any progress is to be expected because of the inherently normative character of the literature. A final view is that progress in the literature on the social responsibilities of business is obscured or even hampered by the continuing introduction of newconstructs. This article explores which of these three views better describes the evolution of the literature during a period of 30 years and suggests implications for further research.

Key Words: corporate social responsibility • corporate social performance • bibliometry • theory developmenta


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Business SocietyHome page
M. S. Schwartz and A. B. Carroll
Integrating and Unifying Competing and Complementary Frameworks: The Search for a Common Core in the Business and Society Field
Business Society, June 1, 2008; 47(2): 148 - 186.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Business SocietyHome page
J. Graafland, M. Kaptein, and C. Mazereeuw - van der Duijn Schouten
Conceptions of God, Normative Convictions, and Socially Responsible Business Conduct: An Explorative Study Among Executives
Business Society, September 1, 2007; 46(3): 331 - 368.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Business SocietyHome page
F. G. A. de Bakker, P. Groenewegen, and F. den Hond
A Research Note on the Use of Bibliometrics to Review the Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Social Performance Literature
Business Society, March 1, 2006; 45(1): 7 - 19.
[Abstract] [PDF]