Author

  • P.K. Haldar

    • Tripura University, (A Central University), Suryamaninagar, Agartala, Tripura, India
    • India

  • Lokanath Mishra

    • Institute of Management, J.K. Lakshmipat University, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India
    • India

Abstract

CG and CSR can be described as two sides of the same coin. Better governance leads the corporates to behave responsibly for the wellbeing of all the stakeholders. CSR is the medium through which corporates address the large group of stakeholders. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) moving far ahead from its age old domain of philanthropy and charity has now reached to a new hallmark of Corporate responsiveness and action to social issues and demand for sustainability in order to advance further towards a new era of collective future action for factoring the sustainable business strategy for good governance and development of the society and its people. The recent changing in the laws in India related to CSR and CG practices in India triggers this study to determine the relationship between them and also measure the influence of governance attributes on CSR practices of Indian corporates. The BSE SENSEX companies in India are the leaders in good governance practices and also the flag bearers in carrying out major CSR activities even when the CSR was not mandatory in India. The influence of corporate board attributes like Board Size, Board independent, Chairman-CEO duality, Female representative in corporate board, multiple directorships, and Promoter and directors shareholding on Corporate Social Responsibility measured through multiple regression analysis. The results revealed that chairman-CEO duality and the present of female directors in corporate board significantly influence of CSR contribution. Before generalization of the result of study further research could be undertaken taking a large group of Indian companies and wider corporate governance variables.

Keywords

References

  • Adamas, C. A., Hill, W. & Roberts, C. B. (1998). Corporate Social Reporting Practices in Western Europe: Legitimating Corporate Behavior? British Accounting Review , 30(1), 1-12.
  • Allen, E. (2004). Evaluating the Corporate Board. Strategic Finance , 85(7), 37-43.
  • Ayuso & Argandona. (2009). Responsible Corporate Governance: Towards a Stakeholder Board of Directors? Journal of Business Ethics, 10(2), 27-31.
  • Bear, S., Rahman, N. & Post, C. (2010). The Impact of Board Diversity and Gender Composition on Corporate Social Responsbility and Firm Reputation. Journal of Business Ethics , 97, 207-221.
  • Beltratti, A. (2005). The complementarity between Corporate Governance and Corporate Social Responsbility. Geneva: The International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics.
  • Byard D., Li Y. & Weintrop J. (2006). Corporate Governance and the Quality of Financial Analyst's Information. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy , 25, 609-625.
  • Dunn, P. & Sainty, B. (2004). The Impact of Insider Power on Fraudulent Financial Reporting. Journal of Management , 30(3), 397-412.
  • Dunn, P. & Sainty, B.(2009).The relationship among board of director characteristics, corporate social performance and corporate financial performance. International Journal of Managerial Finance , 5, 407-423.
  • Elkington, J. (2006). Governance for Sustainability. Corporate Governance: An International Review , 14, 522529.
  • Fang, S. R., Huang, C. Y. & Huang, S. W. L. (2010). Corpoate Social resposbilitiy strategies, dynamic capability and organisational performance: Cases of top Taiwan-selected benchmark enterprises. African Journal of Business Management , 4(1), 120-132.
  • Farber, D. (2005). Restoring Trust After Fraud: Does Corporate Governance Matter? The Accounting Review , 80(2), 539-561.
  • Fich, E. M. & Shivdasani, A. (2006). Are Busy Boards Effective Monitors? The Journal of Finance , 61(2), 689724.
  • Gray, R., Owen, D. & Adams, C. (1996). Accounting and Accountability : Changes and challanges in Corporate Social and Environment Reporting. Prentice-Hall International (UK) LTd, London.
  • Gul, F. A. & Leung, S. (2004). Board Leadership, Outside Directors' Expertiseand Voluntary CSR Disclosure. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy , 23, 351-379.
  • Hossain, M. & Reaz, M. (2007). The determinants and characteristics of voluntary disclosures by Indian companies. Corporate Social Responsbility and Environmental Management , 14(5), 274-288.
  • Htay , S. N. N., Rashid, H. M. A., Adnan, M. A. & Meera, A. K. M. (2012). Impact of Corporate Governance on Social and Environmental Information Disclosure of Malaysian Listed Banks: Panel Data Analysis. Asian Journal Finance & Accounting , 4(1), 1-24.
  • Huang, C. J. (2010). Corporate Governance, Corporate Social Responsbility and Corporate Performance. Journal of Management & Organisation , 16, 641-655.
  • Hurther, J. (1997). An empirical test of the effect of board size on firm efficiency. Ec Letter , 54, 259-264.
  • Ibrahim, N. A. & Angelidis, J. P. (2011). Effect of Board Members gender on Corporate Social Responiveness orientation. Journal of Applied Business Research , 10, 35-40.
  • Ingley, C. (2008). Company Growth andn Board Attributes to Corporate Socia Responsbility. International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics , 4, 17-39.
  • Jamali, D., Safieddine, A. & Rabbath, M. (2008). Corporate Governance and Corporate Social Responsbility Synergies and Interrelationship. Journal Compilation , 16(5), 443-459.
  • Jensen, M. & Meckling, W. (1976). Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behaviour, Agency Costs, and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics , 3, 305-360.
  • Kakabadse, A. P. (2007). Being Responsbile: Boards are reexamining the bottom line. Leadership in Action , 27, 3-6.
  • Khilf, H. & Souissi, M. (2010). The Determinants of Corporate Disclosure: A Meta-Analysis. International Journal of Accounting and Information Management , 18(3), 198-219.
  • Klein, A. (2002b). Economic Determinants of Audit Committee Independence. The Accounting Review , 77(2), 435-452.
  • Lucyanda, J. & Siagian, L. G. P. (2012). The Influence of Company Characteristics Towards Corporate Social Responsbilitiy Disclosure. Proc2012 International Conference on Business and Management, (601619).
  • MacMillan, K., Money, K., Downings, S. & Hillenbrand, C. (2004). Giving Your Organisation SPIRIT: An overview and call to action for directors on issues of corporate governance, corporate reputation and corporate responsbility. Journal of General Management , 30, 15-42.
  • Meryawati, F. (2011). Pengaruh Corporate Governancedan profitabilities terhadap pengungkapan tanggung jawab sosial perusahaan yang terdafter di Bursa Efek Indonesia. Skripsi.1-61.
  • Mishra, S. & Damodar, S. (2010). Does Corporate Social Responsibility Influence Firm Performance of Indian Companies. Journal of Business Ethics , 95(4), 571-601.
  • Mulyadi, S. M. & Yunita, A. (2012). Influence of Corporate Governance and Profitability to Corporate CSR Disclosure. International Journal of Arts and Commerce , 1(7), 29-35.
  • Post, C., Rahman, N. & Rubow, E. (2011). Green Governance: Board of Directors Composition and Environmental Corporate Social Responsbility. Business & Society , 50, 189-223.
  • Purushotahman, M., Phil, H. & Ross, T. (2000). Determinants of Corporate Social Reporting Practices of Listed Singapore Companies. An Accounting Review , 12(2), 101-103.
  • Suwaidan, M. (2004). Social Responsbility Disclosure and Corporate Characteristics: The Case of Jordanian Industrial Companies. International Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Performance Evaluation , 1(4), 229-254.
  • Teoh, H. Y. & Shiu, G. Y. (1990). Attitutde towards Corporate Social Responsbility and Perceived Importance of Social Responsbility Information Characteristics in a Decission Context. Journal of Business Ethics , 9(1), 71-77.
  • Yoshikawa, T. & Phan, P. H. (2003). The Performance Implications of Ownership-driven Governance Reform. European Management Journal , 21(6), 698-706.
  • Young, M. A. (2003). How Can Board Members Be Empowered If They Are Spread Too Thin? S.A.M. Advanced Management Journal , 68(4), 4-11.

Downloads

No downloads have been recorded for this article yet. Figures appear here once readers begin downloading the full text.

How to Cite

Haldar, P., & Mishra, L. (2015). The Changing Facets of Corporate Governance and Corporate Social Responsibilities in India and their Interrelationship. Information Management and Business Review, 7(3), 6-16. https://doi.org/10.22610/imbr.v7i3.1148

Share this article

License

Copyright (c) 2015 P.K. Haldar, Lokanath Mishra (Author)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Author (s) should affirm that the material has not been published previously. It has not been submitted and it is not under consideration by any other journal. At the same time author (s) need to execute a publication permission agreement to assume the responsibility of the submitted content and any omissions and errors therein. After submission of revised paper in the light of suggestions of the reviewers, the editorial team  edits and formats manuscripts to bring uniformity and standardization in published material.

This work will be licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) and under condition of the license, users are free to read, copy, remix, transform, redistribute, download, print, search or link to the full texts of articles and even build upon their work as long as they credit the author for the original work. Moreover, as per journal policy author (s) hold and retain copyrights without any restrictions.

Keywords

Section

Research Paper

Published in

Vol. 7 No. 3 (2015) Governance, Islamic Finance & Accounting Systems View issue contents

Published

2015-06-30

Submissions

Have research to publish? Information Management and Business Review welcomes submissions.

Make a Submission