ULUSAL KÜLTÜR BOYUTLARININ İŞLETMELERİN KURUMSAL SOSYAL SORUMLULUK ÇALIŞMALARINA ETKİSİ

Yıl 2021, , 442 - 460, 31.12.2021

Ayşe Gözde İyicil

https://doi.org/10.17218/hititsbd.1019568

Öz

Bu çalışmanın temel amacı ulusal kültür boyutlarının, işletmelerin kurumsal sosyal sorumluluk çalışmaları üzerindeki muhtemel etkisini incelemektir. Araştırmanın amacına ulaşmak için GLOBE Projesi ile Ulusal Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluk Endeksinde yer alan altmış iki ülkeye ait veriler kullanılmıştır. Verilerin analizinde IBM SPSS 22.0 programından faydalanılmıştır. Yapılan korelasyon ve regresyon analizleri sonucunda ulusal kültür boyutları ile ulusal kurumsal sosyal sorumluluk çalışmaları arasında bir ilişki olduğu ve ulusal kültürün KSS çalışmalarını etkilediği belirlenmiştir. Ulusal kültürün alt boyutlarından belirsizlikten kaçınma, girişkenlik, gelecek odaklılık ve kolektivizm II değişkenlerinin Ulusal Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluk üzerinde önemli (anlamlı) bir yordayıcı etkisi olduğu ortaya çıkmıştır. Diğer değişkenler istatistiksel olarak önemli bir etkiye sahip değildir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kültür, Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluk, GLOBE Projesi, Ulusal Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluk Endeksi

The Effect of National Cultural Dimensions on Corporate Social Responsibility of Businesses

Öz

The main aim of this study was to examine the possible impact of the dimensions of national culture on the corporate social responsibility activities of businesses. In order to reach the purpose of the research, data from sixty-two countries listed in the GLOBE Project and National Corporate Social Responsibility Index were used. IBM SPSS 22.0 was used in the analysis of the data. As a result of the correlation and regression analyzes, it was determined that there is a relationship between the dimensions of national culture and national corporate social responsibility, and that national culture affects CSR activities. It has been revealed that the variables of uncertainty avoidance, assertiveness, future orientation and collectivism II, which are sub-dimensions of national culture, have a statistically significant predictive effect on national corporate social responsibility. Other dimensions of national culture do not have a statistically significant effect.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Culture, Corporate Social Responsibility, GLOBE Project, National Corporate Social Responsibility Index

Kaynakça

• Agudo-Valiente, J. M., Garcés-Ayerbe, C. ve Salvador-Figueras, M. (2017). Corporate social responsibility drivers and barriers according to managers’ perception; evidence from Spanish firms. Sustainability, MDPI, 9(10), 1-24. doi:10.3390/su9101821
• Amor-Esteban, V., García-Sánchez, I.M. ve Galindo-Villardón, M.P. (2017). Analysing the effect of legal system on corporate social responsibility (CSR) at the country level, from a multivariate perspective. Social Indicators Research, 140(1), 435-452. doi: 10.1007/ s11205-017-1782-2
• Campbell, J. L. (2007). Why would corporate behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 946–967. doi:10.2307/20159343
• Carroll, A. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497-505. doi: 10.2307/257850
• Carroll, A. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business and Society, 38, 268–295. doi: 10.1177/000765039903800303
• Carroll, A., Lipartito, K., Post, J. ve Werhane, P. (2012). Corporate responsibility: The American experience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1177/0001839213518025
• Cheney, G., J. Roper ve May, S. (2007). Overview. S. May, G. Cheney and J. Roper (Eds.). The debate over corporate social responsibility içinde (s.3-12). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Crane, A., ve Matten, D. (2004). Questioning the domain of the business ethics curriculum: Where the law ends or where it starts? Journal of Business Ethics, 54, 357-369. doi: 10.1007/s10551-004-1825-x
• Cultural Influences on Leadership and Organizations: Project. (t.y.). GLOBE. The development and cross-cultural validation of scales measuring societal culture, organizational culture, and prototypical leader attributes. Wharton School, PA, in review. Erişim adresi:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/43490722_Cultural_influences_on_leadership_and_organizations_Project_GLOBE
• Cultural Influences on Leadership and Organizations: Project. (t.y.). GLOBE Project. Erişim adresi: https://globeproject.com/studies#overview.
• Czinkota, M.R., ve Skuba, C.J. (2014). Contextual analysis of legal systems and their impact on trade and foreign direct investment. Journal of Business Research, 67, 2207–2211. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.01.005
• Cetindamar, D., ve Husoy, K. (2007). Corporate social responsibility practices and environmentally responsible behavior: The case of The United Nations Global Compact. Journal of Business Ethics, 76, 163–176. doi: 10.1007/s10551-006-9265-4
• Demirbag, M., Wood, G., Makhmadshoev, D. ve Rymkevich, O. (2017). Varieties of CSR: Institutions and socially responsible behaviour. International Business Review, 26, 1064-1074. doi: 10.1016/j.ibusrev.2017.03.011
• Dorfman, P., ve Howell, J. (1988). Dimension of national culture and effective leadership patterns: Hofstede revisited. Advances in international comparative management: A research annual, 127149.Erişimadresi:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233894930_Dimension_of_national_culture_and_effective_leadership_patterns_Hofstede_revisited
• Elkington, J. (1994). Towards the sustainable corporation: Win-win-win business strategies for sustainable development. California Management Review, 36(2), 90-100. doi: 10.2307/41165746
• Emerson, J. (2000). The nature of returns: a social capital markets inquiry into elements of investment and the blended value proposition. Harvard Business School Social Enterprise Series, 1(17). Erişim adresi: https://www.fi-compass.eu/sites/default/files/publications/ the-nature-of-returns-a-social-capitla-market-inquiry-into-elements-of-investment-and-the-blended-value-proposition.pdf
• Fortanier, F., Kolk, A. ve Pinkse, J. (2011). Harmonization in CSR reporting. Management International Review, 51, 665-696. doi:10.2307/41411001
• Freeman, R.E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Marshfield: Pitman Publishing.
• Gjølberg, M. (2009). Measuring the immeasurable? Constructing an index of CSR practices and CSR performance in 20 countries. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 25, 10-22. doi: 10.1016/j.scaman.2008.10.003
• Graves, A.W. (1986). Effects of direct instruction and metacomprehension training on finding main ideas. Learning Disabilities Research, 1, 90-100.
• Gray, R., Owen, D. ve Maunders, K. (1987). Corporate social reporting. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall.Erişimadresi:https://www.environmentandsociety.org/sites/default/files/key_docs/gray_3_1.pdf
• Gugler, P., ve Shi, J. Y. J. (2009). Corporate social responsibility for developing country multinational corporations: Lost war in pertaining global competitiveness? Journal of Business Ethics, 87, 3-24. Erişim adresi: https://link.springer.com/article/ 10.1007/s10551-008-9801-5
• Guthrie, J., ve Parker, L.D. (1989). Corporate social reporting: A rebuttal of legitimacy theory. Accounting and Business Research, 19(76), 343-352. doi: 10.1080/00014788.1989. 9728863
• Guthrie, J., ve Parker, L.D. (1990). Corporate social disclosure practice: A comparative international analysis. Advances in Public Interest Accounting, 3(1), 159-175. Erişim adresi: https://researchers.mq.edu.au/en/publications/corporate-social-disclosure-practice-a-comparative-international--2
• Halkos, G., ve Skouloudis A. (2017). Revisiting the relationship between corporate social responsibility and national culture: a quantitative assessment. Management Decision, 55(3), 595-613. doi: 10.1108/MD-12-2016-0868
• Hill, R. P., Ainscough, T., Shank, T. ve Manullang, D. (2007). Corporate social responsibility and socially responsible investing: A global perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 70(2), 165-174. doi: 10.1007/s10551-006-9103-8
• Ho, F. N., Wang, H. D., ve Vitell, S. (2012). A global analysis of corporate social performance: The effects of cultural and geographic environments. Journal of Business Ethics, 107(4), 423-433. doi: 10.1007/s10551-011-1047-y
• Hofstede, G. (1980). Cultures consequences. California: Sage Publication.
• Holloway, J., Ingberman, D., ve King, R. (1999). An analysis of settlement and meritunder federal securities law: What will be the effect of the reform of 1995? Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 18(1), 1-30.
• House, R., Javidan, M., Hanges, P. ve Dorfman, P. (2002). Understanding cultures and implicit leadership theories across the globe: an introduction to project GLOBE. Journal of World Business, 37(1), 3-10. Doi: 10.1016/S1090-9516(01)00069-4
• House, R., Hanges, P., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. ve Gupta, V., (2004). Leadership and Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies. USA: SAGE Publications. Erişim adresi: https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1005&context=jacl
• House, R. J., Quigley, N. R. ve Luque, M. S. (2010). Insights from Project GLOBE, International Journal of Advertising, 29(1), 111-139. doi: 10.2501/S0265048709201051.
• Hunt, S. D., ve Vitell, S. M. (1993). The general theory of marketing ethics: A retrospective and revision. N. C. Smith and J. A. Quelch (Eds.). Ethics in marketing içinde (775-784). IL: Homewood Irwin.
• Jamali, D. (2008). A stakeholder approach to corporate social responsibility: A fresh perspective into theory and practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 82, 213-231. doi: 10.1007/s10551-007-9572-4
• Jamali, D., ve Keshishian, T. (2009). Uneasy alliances: lessons learned from partnerships between businesses and NGOs in the context of CSR. Journal of Business Ethics, 84, 277-295. doi: 10.1007/s10551-008-9708-1
• Javidan, M., ve Dastmalchian, A. (2009). Managerial implications of the GLOBE Project: A study of 62 societies. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 47, 41-58. doi: 10.1177/ 1038411108099289
• Javidan, M., ve House, R.J. (2001). Cultural acumen for the global manager: Lessons from Project GLOBE. Organizational Dynamics, 29(4), 289–305. doi: 10.1016/S0090-2616(01)00034-1
• Javidan, M., Stahl, G., Brodbeck, F. ve Wilderom, C. (2005). Cross-border transfer of knowledge: Cultural lessons from project GLOBE. Academy of Management Executive, 19, 59-76. Erişim adresi: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228803543_Javidan_M_Stahl_ G_K_Brodbeck_F_Wilderom_C_2005_Crossborder_transfer_of_knowledge_Cultural_lessons_from_project_GLOBE_Academy_of_Management_Executive_19_59-76
• Kang, K.H., Lee, S. ve Yoo, C. (2016). The effect of national culture on corporate social responsibility in the hospitality industry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28(8), 1728-1758. doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-08-2014-0415
• Kanter, R.M. (1999). From spare change to real change: the social sector as beta site for business innovation. Harvard Business Review, 77(3), 122-123. Erişim adresi: https://hbr.org/ 1999/05/from-spare-change-to-real-change-the-social-sector-as-beta-site-for-business-innovation
• Kolk, A., ve Pinkse, J. (2011). Harmonization in CSR Reporting. Management International Review, 51, 665-696. doi: 10.2307/41411001
• KPMG International, (2015). The KPMG survey of corporate responsibility reporting. Switzerland: International Cooperative. Erişim adresi: https://assets.kpmg/content/dam/kpmg/ xx/pdf/2017/10/kpmg-survey-of-corporate-responsibility-reporting-2017.pdf
• Matten, D., ve Moon, J. (2008). Implicit and explicit CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 1-26. Erişim adresi: 10.5465/AMR.2008.31193458
• Midttun A, Gautesen K. ve Gjølberg M. (2006). The political economy of CSR in Western Europe. Corporate Governance, 6, 369–385. doi: 10.1108/14720700610689496
• Mohan, A. (2006). Global corporate social responsibilities management in MNCs. Journal of Business Strategies, 23(1), 9-32. doi: 10.54155/jbs.23.1.9-32
• Mueller, K., Hattrup, K., Spiess, S., O. ve Lin-Hi, N. (2012). The effects of corporate social responsibility on employees’ affective commitment: A cross-cultural investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(6), 1186–1200. doi: 10.1037/a0030204
• Newman, K. L. (1996). Culture and congruence: The fit between management practices and national culture. Journal of International Business Studies, 27(4), 753. Erişim adresi: https://books.google.com.tr/Newman,K.L.Cultureandcongruence:Thefitbetweenmanagementpracticesandnationalculture
• Olie, R. (1995). The 'culture' factor in personnel and organization policies. A. Harzing and V. R. J. London(Eds.) International human resource management: an integrated approach içinde (s(124-143). USA: Sage Publications.
• Özkara, Z.U, ve Yazıcı, N. (2019). İşletmelerde sürdürülebilirliğin sağlanmasında iç denetimin yönetim fonksiyonu ile etkileşimi. G. Kurt ve S. Karacaer (Eds.). Denetimde seçme konular 2 içinde (s.137-152). Ankara, Gazi Kitabevi.
• Peng, Y., ve Dashdeleg, A.U. (2014). National culture and firm’s CSR engagement: A cross-nation study. Journal of Marketing and Management, 5(1), 38-49. doi: 10.7763/IPEDR. 2012.V58. 9
• Porter, M.E., ve Kramer, M.R. (2011). Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review, 89(1/2), 62–77. Erişim adresi: https://hbr.org/2011/01/the-big-idea-creating-shared-value
• Prahalad, C.K., ve Hart, S.L. (2002). The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid. Strategy+Business, 26, 54–67. doi: 10.19177/reen.v1e220081-23
• Rangan, K., Chase, L.A. ve Karim, S. (2012). Why every company needs a CSR strategy and how to build it. Hbs Working Paper Series. Erişim adresi: https://www.hbs.edu/ris/ Publication%20Files/12-088.pdf
• Ringov, D., ve Zollo, M. (2007). The impact of national culture on corporate social performance. Corporate Governance, 7, 476-485. doi: 10.1108/14720700710820551
• Robertson, D., C. (2009). Corporate social responsibility and different stages of economic development: Singapore, Turkey, and Ethiopia. Journal of Business Ethics, 88(4), 617–633. Erişim adresi: https://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1014& context= lgst_papers
• Schwartz, S. H. (1999). A theory of cultural values and some implications for work. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 48(1), 23-47. doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.1999. tb00047.x
• Segall, M. H., Lonner, W. J., ve Berry, J. W. (1998). Cross-cultural psychology as a scholarly discipline: On the flowering of culture in behavioral research. American Psychologist, 53(10), 1101–1110. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.53.10.1101
• Skouloudis, A., Isaac, D. ve Evaggelinos, K. (2016). Revisiting the national corporate social responsibility index. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 23(1), 61-70. doi: 10.1080/13504509.2015.1099121
• Sondergaard, M. (1994). Research note: Hofstede´s consequences – A study of reviews, citations and replications. Organization Studies, 15(3), 447-456. doi: 10.1177/ 017084069401500307
• Steensma, K., Marino, L., ve Weaver, K. (2000). Attitudes toward cooperative strategies: a cross cultural analysis of entrepreneurs. Journal of Personality of International Business Studies, 31(4), 591-609 doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490924
• Thanetsunthorn, N. (2015). The impact of national culture on corporate social responsibility: evidence from cross-regional comparison. Asian J Bus Ethics, 4, 35–56. Erişim adresi: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13520-015-0042-2
• Tuna, A. A., Özkara, Z. U., ve Taş, A. (2019). Paydaş temelli kurumsal sosyal sorumluluk ölçeğinin Türkçe’ye uyarlanması çalışması. Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 21(2), 263-285. doi: 10.26745/ahbvuibfd.542265
• United Nations Industrial Development Organization, UNIDO, (2002). Corporate social responsibility: Implications for small and medium enterprises in developing countries. Vienna: United Nations Industrial Development Organization. Erişim adresi: https://www.unido.org/sites/default/files/200807/CSR__Implications_for_SMEs_in_Developing_Countries_0.pdf
• Van-Marrewijk, M. (2003). Concepts and definitions of CSR and corporate sustainability: Between agency and communion. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(2/3), 95-105. Erişim adresi: https://www.jstor.org/stable/25075020?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents
• Welford, R., Chan, C. ve Man, M. (2008). Priorities for corporate social responsibility: A survey of businesses and their stakeholders. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 15(1), 52-62. doi: 10.1002/csr.166
• Wotruba T.R. (1997). Industry self-regulation: A review and extension to a global setting. J Public Policy Mark. 16, 38-54. doi: 10.1177/074391569701600105
• Zhao, L., Lee, J. ve Moon, S. (2019). Employee response to CSR in China: the moderating effect of collectivism. Personnel Review, 48(3), 839-863. doi: 10.1108/PR-05-2017-0146