Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluğun Marka İmajına Etkisinde Asil-Vekil Sorunu

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 15 Sayı: 1, 477 - 497, 15.04.2022

Belis Gülay

https://doi.org/10.18094/josc.975476

Cited By: 1

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı hissedarlar (asil) ve yöneticiler (vekil) arasındaki sorunla kurumsal sosyal sorumluluk arasındaki karşılıklı ilişkiyi belirleyerek asil-vekil sorununun marka imajına etkileri konusunda farkındalık yaratmaktır. Çalışmada asil-vekil sorununun Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluk önünde bir engel mi olduğu ya da Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluk faaliyetlerinin asil-vekil sorununu daha da mı derinleştirdiği, asil-vekil sorununun marka imajına olası etkilerinin neler olduğu sorularına yanıt aranacaktır. Literatürde Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluk faaliyetleri ile marka imajı arasındaki ilişkiyi irdeleyen çok sayıda çalışma mevcuttur. Ancak bu ilişkide asil-vekil sorununun yerine değinen çalışmaya rastlanmamıştır. Daha çok İşletme disiplininin ilgi odağı olan asil-vekil sorunu pazarlama çalışmalarında fazla yer bulmadığından bu çalışmanın hem işletme hem de pazarlama akademisyenleri ve profesyonellerine yol gösterici nitelikte olacağı düşünülmektedir.
Çalışmada üç tane önerme ileri sürülmüştür: Birincisi: Asil-vekil sorunu işletmelerin Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluk anlayışından uzak durmasına yol açar. İkincisi: Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluk Asil-Vekil sorunu doğurur, üçüncüsü: Asil-vekil sorunu marka imajını olumsuz yönde etkiler önermeleridir. Bu üç önerme asil – vekil ilişkisi yönünden ele alınmıştır

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kurumsal sosyal sorumluluk, Asil vekil sorunu, Marka imajı, Vekalet teorisi, Bilgi asimetrisi

Principal – Agent Problem in the Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility on Brand Image

Öz

The aim of this study is to create awareness about the impact of agency problem on brand image by determining the reciprocal relationship between agency problem (principal vs agent) and corporate social responsibility. The study will seek answers to the questions whether the agency problem is an obstacle to Corporate Social Responsibility, or whether Corporate Social Responsibility activities deepen agency problem, and what the possible effects of the agency problem on the brand image are. There are many studies in the literature that examine the relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility activities and brand image. However, no study addressing the agency problem was found in this relationship. It is thought that this study will guide both business and marketing academics and professionals, since agency problem, which is the focus of attention of the business discipline, does not find much place in marketing studies. Three propositions were put forward in the study: First; Principal-agent problem causes businesses to stay away from Corporate Social Responsibility. Corporate Social Responsibility creates Principal-Agent problem, and the third one; the principal-agent problem is that they suggest that they negatively affect the brand image. These three propositions are discussed in terms of principal-agent relationship

Anahtar Kelimeler

Corporate Social Responsibility, Agency problem, Brand image, Agency theory, Information asymmetry

Kaynakça

• Aish, E. M., Kortam, W., & Hassan, S. (2008). Using agency theory in understanding switching behavior in B2B service industries “I”. Tourism and Hospitality, 6, 1-13.
• Akerloff, G. A. (1978). The market for "lemons": Quality, uncertainity and the market mechanism. Uncertainity in Economics, 235, 237-251.
• Aktan, C. C., & Börü, D. (2007). Kurumsal sosyal sorumluluk. C. C. Aktan içinde, Kurumsal sosyal sorumluluk, İşletmeler ve sosyal sorumluluk (s. 7-25). İstanbul: İGİAD.
• Amini, C., & Bianco, S. D. (2017). Corporate social responsibility and Latin American firm performance. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 17(3).
• Barrios, J. M., Fasan, M., & Nanda, D. (2014). Is corporate social responsibility an agency problem? Evidence from CEO turnovers. Semantic Scholar.
• Beaudoin, C. A. (2008). Earnings management: The role of the agency problem and corporate social responsibility. Doktora tezi. Drexel University.
• Benabou, R., & Tirole, J. (2010). Individual and corporate social responsibility. Economica, 77(305), 1-19.
• Bergen, M., Dutta, S., & Walker, O. C. (1992). Agency relationships in marketing: A review of the implications and applications of agency and related theories. Journal of Marketing, 56, 1-24.
• Bhimani, A., & Soonawalla, K. (2005). From conformance to performance: the corporate responsibilities continuum. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 24, 165-174.
• Blomqvist, K. H., & Posner, S. (2004). Three strategies for integrating CSR with brand marketing. Market Leader, Summer, 33-36.
• Borrington, K., & Stimpson, P. (2013). Cambridge Igcse Business Studies (4 b.). London: Hodder Education.
• Brigham, E., & Houston, J. (2009). Fundamentals of financial management (12 b.). Mason: South-Western Cengage Learning.
• Can, M. (2018). Objectivist etik ya da rasyonel bencillik ahlakı. Atatürk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 22(4).
• Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social sesponsibility toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39-48.
• Carroll, A. B. (2004). Managing ethically with global stakeholders: A present and future challenge. Academy of ManagementExecutive, 18(2), 114-120.
• Cespa, G., & Cestone, G. (2007). Corporate social responsibility and managerial entrenchment. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 16, 741-777.
• Chen, C. X., Lu, H., & Sougiannis, T. (2012). The agency problem, corporate governance, and the assymetrical behavior of selling, general and administrative costs. Contemporary Accounting Research, 29(1), 252-282.
• Chen, R., & He, F. (2003). Examination of brand knowledge, perceived risk and consumers' intention to adopt an online retailer. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 14(6), 677-693.
• Dalğıran, Y. (2014). Asil-vekil ilişkisinde asilin körlüğü: Türkiye’de asil-vekil ilişkisinde vekilin sahip olduğu güce bağlı. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Ankara: Başkent Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü İşletme Anabilim Dalı.
• Dalton, D. R., Hitt, M. A., Certo, S. T., & Dalton, C. M. (tarih yok). The fundemental agency problem and its mitigation. The Academy of Management Annals, 1(1), 1-64.
• Demski, J., & Feltham, G. (1978). Economic incentives in budgetary control systems. Accounting Review, 53, 336-359.
• Den Hond, F., & Bakker, F. G. (2007). Ideologically motivated activism: How activist groups influence corporate social change activities. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 901-924.
• Doshi, H. A., Manual, V., Lingaradan, D., & Mujib, U. K. (2018). The impact of corporate social responsibility on corporate financial performance & the concept and role of agency theory. International Journal of Financial Management, 16(20), 2-38.
• Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. The Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57-74. https://www.jstor.org/stable/258191 adresinden alındı
• Ellen, P. S., Webb, D. J., & Mohr, L. A. (2006). Building corporate associations: Consumer attributions for corporate socially responsible programs.
• Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 147-157.
• Fama, E. F. (1980). Agency problems and the theory of the firm. Journal of Political Economy, 88, 288-307.
• Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26, 301-325.
• Gargiulo, M., & Benassi, M. (2000). Trapped in your own net? Network cohesion, structural holes, and the adaptation of social capital. Organization Science, 11(2), 183-196.
• Gündüz, Ş. (2018). Founder syndrome at the backstage of agecy theory: A threat to corporate governance and corporate social responsibility. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 6(1), 1-16.
• He, Y., & Lai, K. K. (2014). The effect of corporate social responsibility on brand loyalty: The mediating role of brand image. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 25(3-4), 249-263.
• Hillman, A. J., Withers, M. C., & Collins, B. J. (2009). Resource dependence theory: A review. Journal of Management, 35(6), 1404-1427.
• Hung, C. (2005). The effect of brand image on public relations perceptions and customer loyalty . International Journal of Management, 25(2), 327-246.
• Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: managerial behaviour, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 16(5), 305-360.
• Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1-22.
• Keown, A., Martin, J., & Petty, J. (2017). Foundations of finance (4 b.). Boston: Pearson.
• Ker, M. (1998). Pazarlama Dünyası, 12(71), 25-28.
• Ker-Tah, H. (2012). The advertising effects of corporate social responsibility on corporate reputation and brand equity: Evidence from the life insurance industry in Taiwan. Journal of Business Ethics, 109, 312-326.
• Kitchin, T. (2003). Corporate responsibility: A brand extension. Journal of Brand Management, 10(4-5), 312-326.
• Klein, J., & Dawar, N. (2004). Corporate social responsibility and consumers' attributions and brand evaluations in a product-harm crisis. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21(3), 203-217.
• Klein, N. (2002). No logo. (U. Nalan, Çev.) Ankara: Bilgi yayınları.
• Koçyiğit, S. Ç., & Gök, G. (2019). Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluk (KSS). Ankara: İksad Yayınevi.
• Kotler, P., & N., L. (2005). Corporate social responsibility: Doing the good for your company and your cause. Toronto: John Wiley & Sons.
• Lai, C. S., Chiu, C. J., Yang, C. F., & Pai, D. C. (2010). The effects of corporate social responsibility on brand performance: The mediating effect of industrial brand equity and corporate reputation. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(1), 457-469.
• Lindgreen, A., Xu, Y., Manon, F., & Wilcock, J. (2012). Corporate social responsibility brand leadership: A multiple case study. European Journal of Marketing, 46(7-8), 965-993.
• Maignan, I., Ferrell, 0. C., & Ferrell, L. (2005). A stakeholder model for implementing social responsibility in marketing. European Journal of Marketing, 39(9-10), 957-977.
• Maio, E. (2003). Managing brand in the new stakeholder environmental. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(2), 235-246.
• Maldonado-Guzman, G., Pinzon-Castro, S. Y., & Leana-Morales, C. (2017). Corporate Social Responsibility, Brand Image and Firm Reputation in Mexican Small Business. Journal of Management and Sustainability, 7(3), 38-47.
• Maon, F., Lindgreen, A., & Swaen, V. (2009). Designing and implementing corporate social responsibility: An integrative framework grounded in theory and practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(1), 71-89.
• McElhaney, K. (2008). Just good business: The strategic guide to aligning corporate responsibility and brand. CA: Berret-Koehler Publishing.
• McWilliams, A., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, P. M. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: International perspectives. Social Science Research Network: https://ssrn.com/abstract=900834 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.900834 adresinden alındı
• McWilliams, A., Siegel, D., & Wright, P. M. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: Strategic implications. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 1-18.
• Menon, S., & Kahn, B. (2003). Corporate sponsorship of philanthropic activities: When do they impact perception of sponsor brand? Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13(3), 316-327.
• Morales, O. G., Gonzales, J. A., & Fumero, M. A. (2016). Governance, corporate social responsibility and cooperation in sustainable tourist destinations: the case of Island of Fuerteventura. Island Studies Journal, 11(2), 561-584.
• Morgan, A. (2009). Eating the big fish: How challenger brands can compete against brand leaders (2 b.). New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
• Ng, K. (2010). Financial management (1 b.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Özdemir, H. (2009). Kurumsal sosyal sorumluluğun marka imajına etkisi. İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 8(15), 57-72.
• Pagano, M., Volpin, P. F., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Finance, 24, 403-441.
• Panda, B., & Leepsa, N. (2017). Agency theory: Review of theory and evidence on problems and perspectives. Indian Journal of Corporate Governance, 10(1), 74-95.
• Peris, R. W., Containi, E., Savoia, J. R., & Bergmann, D. R. (2017). Does better corporate governance increase organisational performance? Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 4(4), 1-11.
• Polonsky, M.; Jevons, C. (2006). Understanding issue complexity when building a socially responsible brand. European Business Review, 18(5), 340-349.
• Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard BusinessReview, 82(12), 78-92.
• Rand, A. (1992). Atlas shrugged. New York: New American Library.
• Ruangviset, J., Jiraporn, P., & Kim, J. C. (2014). Replacing the founder: Exploring the myth of the entrepreneur's disease. Business Horizons, 35(6), 1055-1057.
• Sen, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Korschun, D. (2006). The role of corporate social responsibility in strengthening multiple stakeholder relationship: A field experiment. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Research, 34(2), 158-166.
• Sen, S.; Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 225-243.
• Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1997). A survey of corporate governance. The Journal of Finance, 52(2), 737-783.
• Smith, A. D., & Synowka, D. P. (2006). Exploring agency theory implications with franchising. Journal of Business & Economic Research, 4(4), 21-28.
• Smith, C. (2003). Corporate social responsibility: Whether or how? CaliforniaManagement Review, 45(4), 52-76.
• Tirole, J. (2001). Corporate governance. Econometrica, 1-35.
• Werther, W. B., & Chandler, D. (2005). Strategic corporate social responsibility as a global brand insurance. Business Horizons, 48(4), 317-324.