Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal

Entrepreneurial CSR, managerial role, and firm resources: a case study approach
Abel Duarte Alonso, Ian Patrick Austin,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Abel Duarte Alonso, Ian Patrick Austin, "Entrepreneurial CSR, managerial role, and firm resources: a case study approach",
Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal , https://doi.org/10.1108/CR-10-2016-0064
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/CR-10-2016-0064
Downloaded on: 02 July 2018, At: 11:50 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 0 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 10 times since 2018*
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:606321 []
For Authors
Downloaded by Washington University in St Louis At 11:50 02 July 2018 (PT)

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please
visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication
Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 Entrepreneurial CSR, managerial role, and firm resources: A case study approach

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this study is to contribute to the extant body of the
entrepreneurship and business management literature, investigating corporate social
responsibility and its implications for firms’ competitiveness. The cases of four different
firms are examined through the lens of the resource-based view of the firm and role theory.

Design/methodology/approach – Face to face and telephone interviews were conducted with

the owners and managers of four model firms identified in Western Australia.
Downloaded by Washington University in St Louis At 11:50 02 July 2018 (PT)

Findings – While financial outcomes clearly stand out as the end goal for engaging in CSR
related practices, the importance of firm managers’ entrepreneurial role emerges, in utilising
existing resources to exploit business opportunities to ultimately achieve competitiveness,
benefit the organisation, the community, and society. Management’s ability to reconcile
financial objectives and CSR practices give rise to the notion of entrepreneurial CSR.

Originality/value – The study demonstrates that management’s entrepreneurial drive, skills,

knowledge, expertise, or strategic strengths can identify substantial opportunities.
Furthermore, the investment of resources to develop socially responsible products and
services can help achieve CSR and the firm’s bottom line. Finally, learning about
participants’ motivations for engaging in CSR could identify areas, concepts, and directions to
be considered by entrepreneurs, compared/contrasted to previous research, or even
operationalised by enterprises of different sizes elsewhere.

Keywords: CSR, initiatives, firm ownership/management, motivation, resource-based view,

role theory.

Introduction
Increasingly, firms’ managers are asked to deliver innovative answers to fundamental
problems, and firm leaders are becoming proactive in addressing calls for increased CSR
(Margolis and Walsh, 2003). Defined “as any discretionary corporate activity intended to
further social welfare” (Barnett, 2007, p. 795), CSR is also related to moral and ethical issues
that concern corporate behaviour and decision-making (Branco and Rodrigues, 2006).

The links between CSR and corporate social performance (CSP), and corporate financial
performance (CFP) have been investigated (e.g., Brammer and Millington, 2008). However,
over the decades, debate has surrounded the discussion of such links (e.g., Barnett, 2007). In
their summarisation of CFP-CSR relationships, Margolis and Walsh (2001) identified mixed
results. Indeed, analysing CSP an independent variable identified a positive CFP-CSP
relationship in 53% of the studies; however, when CSP was analysed as a dependent variable,
the percentage increased to 68 (Margiolis and Walsh, 2001).

Other authors (Burke and Logsdon, 1997) propose a broader analysis of the impact of CSR by
essentially focusing on strategic, as opposed to financial benefits for the firm. The authors
identify five strategy related dimensions, namely, centrality, specificity, proactivity,
voluntarism, and visibility as potentially beneficial in assessing the value that CSR
 programmes may create for firms. One of these dimensions, centrality, provides managers
with feedback and direction as to whether or not engaging in actions or making certain
decisions may be consistent with firms’ goals, mission, and objectives (Burke and Logsdon,
1997).

Despite a wealth of CSR related research, there are knowledge gaps, for instance, in that
marginal attention has been paid to smaller firms (Evans and Sawyer, 2010; Russo and
Tencati 2009). Indeed, researchers have predominantly focused on large at the expense of
small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) (Perrini et al., 2007). Similarly, while the
behaviour of large businesses’ management is undoubtedly significant to the economy and
shareholders, comparatively, small or family businesses are marginally studied (Fitzgerald et
al., 2010). In the context of family firms, Dyer and Whetten (2006) affirm that little
information exists concerning the impact of management and family ownership on CSP.
Additionally, despite the key significance of Western Australia for Australia’s economy
Downloaded by Washington University in St Louis At 11:50 02 July 2018 (PT)

(ABS, 2014), a literature review conducted for this study identifies a dearth of CSR related
research, particularly among family and SMEs.

In choosing a case study approach, this study examines CSR from a sample of four firms
operating in Western Australia. Two of these firms employ 40 or fewer people full-time, and
two employ between 300 and 1000 people worldwide. Enterprises employing 20 or more
people but less than 200 are considered medium in size in Australia, while those employing
200 or above are considered large enterprises (ABS, 2001). Also, three of these firms are
currently exporting products/services. The study addresses the following research questions
(RQs) related to CSR:

RQ1: How, that is, in what specific ways are the participating firms engaging in CSR
activities/initiatives?
RQ2: What, if any, are management’s main motivations for such engagement?

In examining these themes from the perspective of owners/managers, also those from two
medium size firms, the study contributes in helping address the identified knowledge gaps
(Fitzgerald et al., 2010; Perrini et al., 2007). Furthermore, helping answer the research
questions above could provide valuable practical insights to industry stakeholders and
academics. For instance, learning about participants’ motivations for engaging in CSR could
identify areas, concepts, and directions to be considered by entrepreneurs, compared to
previous research, or even operationalised by enterprises of different sizes elsewhere. In
addition, both the resource based view (RBV) of the firm and role theory are incorporated as
the theoretical frameworks. This adoption could not only enhance the understanding of the
above themes, but also provide a foundation to help illuminate future CSR related research,
including on medium size firms. Consequently, the study will also address the following
research question:

RQ3: How do the proposed theoretical frameworks help explain CSR among the participating
firms?

Literature Review
The RBV of the firm
In seeking to gain understanding of the importance of resources and managerial roles of the
studied firms as elements positively affecting their CSR activities and practices, the study
incorporates the RBV of the firm as one of the theoretical frameworks. This adoption is also
2
 in alignment with contemporary research conducted among Australian SMEs (Torugsa et al.,
2013), which highlights the usefulness of RBV as a theoretical framework to understand CSR
initiatives. Barney et al. (2011) underline the usefulness of the theory as a powerful and
prominent tool in helping describe, predict, and explain organisational relationships.

The seminal work of Barney (1991) is central to the earlier development of the theory. Barney
(1991) conceptualises a firm’s internal and external analyses, combining strengths and
weaknesses in the first, and opportunities and threats in the second. The internal analysis
evolves into a resource-based model, while the external analysis results in environmental
models of competitive advantage (Barney, 1991). According to Wacker (1998), conceptual
definitions are one of the key requirements when developing theory. In line with this point,
and in referring to earlier research (Daft, 1983), Barney (1991) provides a broader definition
of firm resources, to include capabilities, firm attributes, knowledge, information, and
organisational processes.
Downloaded by Washington University in St Louis At 11:50 02 July 2018 (PT)

Similarly, Barney (1991) explains that competitive advantage results when a firm is executing
value-creating strategies, which are not simultaneously implemented by any potential or
current competitor. These aspects also apply to sustained competitive advantage, with the
addition that competitors are incapable of duplicating the benefits of the firm’s strategy.
Barney (1991) contends that, while sustained competitive advantage may last longer periods
of time- and therefore be time-bound as other researchers assert (Jacobsen, 1988; Porter,
1985), fundamentally, it is competitors’ inability to duplicate a firm’s strategy that determines
such advantage.

Heterogeneity and immobility or imperfect mobility in firms’ resources are two important
concepts Barney (1991) refers to as critical in sustained competitive advantage. Heterogeneity
suggests that firms with different capabilities can compete or at least breakeven in the
marketplace (Peteraf, 1993). Moreover, within an industry context, heterogeneity may reveal
that superior productive dynamics are in short supply (Peteraf, 1993). Also, when firms are
heterogeneous concerning strategically important resources they possess, barriers to mobility
and entry will exist for potential competitors (Barney, 1991).

Imperfectly mobile resources are those that cannot be traded, particularly in cases where
aspiring imitators would have difficulties of repeating and discovering developmental
processes (Peteraf, 1989). Furthermore, tradeable resources, with more value for a firm
currently employing them, may be considered imperfectly mobile (Peteraf 1993). A similar
explanation by Dierickx and Cool (1989) posits that implementing a particular strategy may
demand ‘nonappropriable’ assets. These assets may originate when there is an absence of
defined property rights, and not markets exist for such assets, for instance, in the cases of
loyalty or trust (Dierickx and Cool, 1989). While clearly not all firm resources may be
heterogeneous and immobile, not all firms may achieve sustained competitive advantage.
However, to achieve such advantage, Barney (1991) presents four attributes that must be
fulfilled; a firm’s resources must be:

Valuable, in that such resources enable firms’ management to implement or develop strategies
to improve their effectiveness or efficiency.

Rare: Barney (1991) acknowledges that the degree of ‘rareness’ required to generate
competitive advantage is difficult to establish. However, he suggests that when firms’

3
 valuable resources are unique compared to those of other potential or actual competitors, at
the very least, those resources will create competitive advantage.

Imperfectly imitable: The assertion that firms are intrinsically social and historical entities,
and management’s ability to exploit and/or acquire resources is based on their place in space
and time (Barney, 1991). Once such unique time in history passes, other firms not possessing
time and space-dependent resources are unable to obtain them, rendering those resources
imperfectly imitable (Barney, 1991).

Non-substitutable, that is, no equivalent substitutes must exist for a particular firm resource
(Barney, 1991); this degree of non-substitutability, or inability by would-be-competitors
highlights the potential for sustained competitive advantage.

While the RBV of the firm has been applied in research examining CSR as a component of
Downloaded by Washington University in St Louis At 11:50 02 July 2018 (PT)

corporations’ strategy (McWilliams et al., 2006), this approach has however received limited
attention (Jones and Bartlett, 2009). One study, which examined SMEs and CSR practices
(Torugsa et al., 2013) revealed the usefulness of the theory in that, by adopting value-creation
strategies that make the most of firms’ capabilities (RBV-related principle), firms can also
“maximise financial returns whilst proactively making progress towards CSR” (Torugsa et al.,
2013, p. 383). Similarly, recent research conducted among SMEs (Stoian and Gilman, 2017)
adopted a strategic approach to CSR based on the RBV of the firm. The authors’ findings
confirmed that CSR initiatives associated with the local community were conducive to firm
growth, in particular among firms engaging in cost leadership strategies. Furthermore, in
employing CSR initiatives associated with their workforce, those SMEs focusing on quality-
driven or differentiation strategies can attain fast growth and avoid decline in sales (Stoian
and Gilman, 2017).

Role theory
Contemporary research discusses the role of organisations and their leaders in executing CSR
initiatives. First, concerning organisations’ responses to globalisation forces, Scherer and
Palazzo (2011) underscore the importance of acknowledging “a new political role of business
that goes beyond mere compliance with legal standards and conformity with moral rule” (p.
906). With regard to organisations’ leaders, a study conducted among company managers
(Godos-Díez et al., 2011) revealed the role of these individuals in driving CSR practices.
Thus, the significance of managerial/organisational role in implementing CSR practices
justified the use of role theory in the present research.

Markham et al. (2010) explain that role theory can facilitate examination of or reflection on
resources and ancillary processes over which the corresponding role player has influence. The
role player assumes “a position or an associated position in any given relationship” (Markham
et al. 2010, p. 405), including boss-employee, or seller-buyer. The theory can also help in
observation of roles themselves, which, among other outcomes, might lead to action
(Markham et al., 2010).

Thus, role theory contributes to the examination of a range of role related behaviours,
including evaluation, performance, expectations, sanctions, and norms (Markham et al.,
2010). Griffin et al. (2007) identify a lack of theoretical frameworks for integrating or
differentiating different constructs that help explain individual performance and its
association with effectiveness” (Griffin et al., 2007). The authors hence highlight the
significance of role theory in terms of its approach to shed light on the comprehensive set of
4
 work responsibilities that are part of a role, by encompassing individual work behaviour and
organisational context.

Biddle’s (1986) contribution to role theory is significant to the present research. Based on
earlier examinations from the fields of social psychology and sociology, Biddle (1986)
discusses the following five perspectives of the theory:

Functional: Generally, functional theory focuses on characteristic behaviours of people

occupying social positions within socially stable systems, and helps describe different parts of
a stable social system, why the system is stable, and how it might encourage conformity
among participants (Biddle, 1986).

Symbolic interactionist: Citing the work of Mead (1934), Biddle (1986) explains that this
theory stresses on the evolution of roles based on social interactions, and on different
Downloaded by Washington University in St Louis At 11:50 02 July 2018 (PT)

cognitive concepts through which social actors interpret and understand their conduct or that
of others. Further, roles are perceived to reflect attitudes, norms, negotiation, or contextual
demands. Another emphasis of ‘symbolic interactionists’ is associated with role taking,
relationships among roles, stress (from role-taking), and emotions (Biddle, 1986).

Structural: Essentially, the central focus of structural theory is on social environments, and
less on individuals; though these are still significant. Indeed, the theory primarily emphasises
on social structures, conceptualised as stable organisations of sets of people, called ‘statuses’
or ‘social positions.’ These individuals share similar behaviours or roles, directed towards
other sets of people within the structure (Biddle, 1986).

Organisational: Hierarchical, task-oriented, and preplanned social systems occurring within

organisations are at the core of this theory; roles in these organisations are suggested to be
caused by normative expectations, and related to social positions (Biddle, 1986). However,
roles may differ among individuals; indeed, they may reflect pressures from informal groups,
and official demands within an organisation (Biddle, 1986). Because sources for norms are
numerous, role conflicts among individuals may appear, and subsequently lead to strain. To
cope with these potentially negative situations, individuals must find solutions or implement
strategies so that they feel happier, and their organisation can prosper (Biddle, 1986).

Cognitive: The fundamental emphasis of the theory is associated with relationships between
behaviour and role expectations. In particular, attention is paid to social conditions that result
in expectations, to the effects that expectations can have on social conduct, and to techniques
for gauging expectations. Cognitive theorists are also concerned with ways in which
individuals perceive the expectations of others, and with the potential impacts that these
perceptions could have on behaviour (Biddle, 1986).

While there is a growing body of research discussing the links between RBV of the firm and
organisations’ CSR initiatives, those between role theory and CSR are still absent in
contemporary research. This lack of research is surprising given the extensive
acknowledgement of the significance of the role of organisations or individuals in facilitating
or executing CSR activities and initiatives (e.g., Godos-Díez et al., 2011; Scherer and Palazzo
(2011). Despite the richness of its conceptual tools, its potential to tie together agent-structure
divides, or various levels of analysis, role theory has not been fashionable (Wehner and Thies,
2014). By incorporating the theory as a lens to examine CSR initiatives from the perspectives
of entrepreneurs, the present study will make an additional important contribution.
5
 Methods
The present study adopts the RBV of the firm and role theory to examine management’s level
of engagement in CSR activities, and motivations among participants for such involvement.
The study is based on the cases of four firms, two medium size and to large, one of them
family owned, and three operating globally. The identified research gaps in the literature
concerning CSR, family and SMEs (Evans and Sawyer, 2010; Fitzgerald et al., 2010; Perrini
et al. 2007; Russo and Tencati, 2009), and the dearth of research conducted in Western
Australia on CSR, particularly among family and SMEs provided opportunities for addressing
some of these limitations.

In line with Yin (1981), and Baxter and Jack (2008), a multiple-case study methodology is
used, in that four different firms are investigated. Case studies examine contemporary
phenomena in real-life contexts, particularly when boundaries between context and
Downloaded by Washington University in St Louis At 11:50 02 July 2018 (PT)

phenomena are unclear (Yin, 1981). Importantly, case study research provides opportunities
for theory development (Eisenhardt 1989). Moreover, developing theory from case study
research could produce theory that is testable, interesting and accurate (Eisenhardt and
Graebner, 2007). Moreover, the characteristic of theory development “makes inductive case
research consistent with the emphasis on testable theory within mainstream deductive
research” (Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007, p. 25).

Flyvbjerg (2006) explains that case study research focuses on ‘why’ and ‘how’ questions, and
can examine views directly related to certain phenomena, as well as “close in” on real-life
situations” (p. 235). The present research fits these criteria. For example, RQ1 seeks to
answer the ‘how’ or the extent to which participants’ firms are involved in CSR activities,
while the ‘why’ question is represented by the motivations of firms’ management/ownership
to engage in those CSR activities (RQ2).

In case study research, quantitative or qualitative evidence can be used, for instance, through
observations, fieldwork, verbal reports, archival records, or a combination thereof (Yin,
1981). This study adopted a qualitative methodology, which focusses on in-depth explorations
(Öberseder, Schlegelmilch, and Gruber, 2011). The qualitative case study method offers
researchers tools to investigate “complex phenomena within their contexts” (Baxter and Jack,
2008, p. 544). The decision to use a qualitative methodology to investigate CSR among
entrepreneurs is also based on the usefulness of using such approach, which is demonstrated
in previous research. For example, Öberseder et al. (2011) employed the methodology, which
also recommends diverse and small samples, to examine the influence of CSR perceptions to
make purchases, thereby interviewing 22 individuals. The authors found that participants’
assessment of CSR initiatives represented a hierarchically structured, complex process that
did not automatically led to their decision to make purchases.

More related to the present research, Jamali et al.’s (2009) also highlighted the value of a
qualitative method, when they compares SMEs and multinational corporations (MNCs) with
regard to their CSR orientations. Their findings revealed some fundamental differences
between the two groups. Among SME managers, there was a philanthropic notion of CSR,
namely, as a duty or responsibility parallel to that of the firm, or on top of central business
transactions. In comparison, when addressing ethical, discretionary, legal or economic areas
of CSR, MNC managers’ predominant focus was on economic aspects. This finding led
Jamali et al. (2009) to suggest that, among members of the MNC group, CSR was perceived

6
 more holistically, and that economic aspects were highlighted more, and at the expense of
discretionary philanthropic elements.

A preliminary round of meetings and interviews with nine industry associations, government,
and regional development agency representatives helped identify 24 model firms operating in
Western Australia, with known innovative and other forward thinking practices. This
identification process follows a snowballing or ‘chain’ sampling, a procedure researchers use
to gain access to potential informants through information provided by different informants
(Noy, 2008), which in this study is information from experts.

The identified firms were subsequently contacted, informed of the purpose of the study, and
invited to take part in the study via face-to-face or telephone interviews. Initially, eight of
these firms agreed to participate in the study. In the process gathering data from these
organisations, it was determined that, while the majority follow standard CSR practices,
Downloaded by Washington University in St Louis At 11:50 02 July 2018 (PT)

particularly in providing employment, donating goods and money, or through sponsorships,

four of these firms are implementing, or are planning to implement distinctive CSR practices.

During the months of September and December of 2015, face-to-face interviews were first
conducted with four individuals working for three of the firms; the average time of these
interviews was 70 minutes. Given the significant geographic distance between one firm’s
location and the researchers’ institution, the fourth interview was first conducted by
telephone, and lasted 45 minutes. However, the participant agreed to be subsequently visited
in December of 2015. The visit allowed for first hand observations of the firm’s operations
and for a second, in-depth, face-to-face interview with the same owner; the visit and
interviews lasted over 180 minutes. To complement the data collected through the interviews,
and aligned with Yin (1981), the participating firms’ websites, as well as industry reports of
these firms, whenever available, were analysed.

The five interviews were digitally recorded with participants’ consent; during the interviews,
written notes were also taken by the research team. These data were subsequently transcribed
verbatim, and cross-checked by the researchers for accuracy and consistency. Content
analysis (Neuendorf, 2002) was used to help identify main themes emerging from the data.

The study is limited, particularly in conveniently sampling the participating firms known to
industry and government experts; therefore, the findings may not allow for making
generalisations. This limitation is recognised by Cavaye (1996), while Darke et al. (1998)
note the degree of subjectivity in both the data collection and analysis of case studies.
Irrespective of the limitations, the four firms exhibited a unique capacity within their industry
to strategically define and execute entrepreneurial and innovative CSR. These firms
distinguished themselves from others through their owner/managers’ forward-thinking
characteristics.

Demographic characteristics: participants and their firms

Table 1 provides a summary with basic demographic characteristics of participants and the
firms where they operate. Given the request by two of the four firm managers to not disclose
the names of their organisations, a decision was made to use the same protocol for all four
participating firms in this study. Firm 1 (F1) is a family owned firm, medium in size; the
participant, labelled as F1P1 in the next sections, is one of the family owners. This firm has
operated for over 10 years; however, the owner has over 40 years of industry experience, first

7
 as grower. The firm specialises in packing, marketing, supplying and exporting a food product
overseas.

Table 1 Here

Firm 2 (F2) is medium in size, is involved in recycling organic carbon and in composting, and
is owned by two business partners. F2 has existed for over 20 years; the participant (F2P2) is
the chief executive officer (CEO) and has several decades of industry experience. The
participant joined the company in 2011.

Firm 3 (F3) is a large firm (300 employees worldwide), over 30 years old, and trades in
technical sales and distribution systems, in mining an industrial mineral, and in different
aspects of the supply chain of this mineral in its various processed forms. The two
participants, F3P1 (International Sales Manager) and F3P2 (CEO) have at least one decade of
Downloaded by Washington University in St Louis At 11:50 02 July 2018 (PT)

experience working at the firm. Firm 4 (F4) is also a large firm, with around 1,000 employees
globally, over 10 years old, and operates in the architecture, planning and urban/interior
design industry. The two business partners managing the firm have more than three decades
of industry experience. F4P4, one of the business partners, is also the company chairman.

Results
RQ1, RQ2: Firms’ extent of involvement in CSR activities/initiatives, motivation
Overall, regardless of the industry and the size of the participating firm, involvement in CSR
activities denotes participants’ entrepreneurial drive, whereby CSR is perceived as a goal to
improve their community or society, and at the same time a potential business opportunity.
Thus, the emergence of ‘entrepreneurial CSR’ is a fundamental finding identified during the
interviews; entrepreneurial CSR is summarised as follows.

First, the term ‘enterprise’ is associated with actions consisting of implementing innovations,
and the individuals implementing those innovations are the entrepreneurs (Schumpeter 1934).
Second, and despite its many definitions (Gartner, 1990), entrepreneurship has been referred
to as ‘new entry’, which can be operationalized in the form of entering either already
established or new markets with existing or new goods and/or services (Lumpkin and Dess,
1996). Third, Sweezy (1943) identifies several characteristics of entrepreneurs, including an
ability to value the potential of an innovation, being able to overcome social or psychological
resistances preventing them from “doing new things” (p. 94), and have leadership qualities.
The following sections present how the different firms are engaging in entrepreneurial CSR
related activities, and why they are engaged.

Firm 1
F1P1 first reflected on the different phases of her family business. From being exclusively a
grower of the product the firm is involved in, increasing competition from growers of the
same product forced the family to consider new ideas and possibilities, clearly underlining the
firm ownership’s entrepreneurial spirit. Today, the family made the strategic decision to
discontinue being a producer, and instead, identified opportunities as a packager, marketer,
consultant, and exporter of the same product, now grown by several dozen other, near-by
producers. The desire to contribute toward the survival of local farming generations,
guarantee future food production, and also benefit the firm were at the centre of F1P1’s
business philosophy. One first important aspect related to CSR and implemented by
management was looking after producers’ long-term welfare; these managerial philosophy
was operationalized through innovation and entrepreneurial drive: “We created pre-packs,
8
 and punnets, and net bags… but now we are going to need to do more than that because no
matter how great you are in your marketing, you still have to do more than that… so we are
constantly thinking of how to do things differently to maximise the return of the growers”

Another key aspect linking entrepreneurship and CSR became obvious when P1F1
identified the significant food wastage across many of Australia’s farms, particularly
due to very strict specifications from retailers and the consumer market. In some cases,
such wastage is as high as 40% of the final product, which ends discarded, or ploughed
on the fields, while growers do not earn any income for the smaller bananas, the
marginal rust spots on fruits or vegetables, or small blemishes. Regarding this important
aspect, Aschemann-Witzel et al. (2016) identify a growing interest between retailers and
food marketers, coupled with innovative ideas, such as cooperation across the supply
chain and its actors, in tackling wastage while developing business opportunities.
Downloaded by Washington University in St Louis At 11:50 02 July 2018 (PT)

A third important aspect was management’s moral obligation to look after a vulnerable
age group, the elderly: “We felt that [the age sector’s]… budget allocations are really
low, food wise, they have to feed within budget… So a lot of the problems in aged care
is that they get cheaper cuts, but it is too tough [sic] to chew because they do not have
the teeth…”

With some potential threats in the horizon, including oversupply of food production, P1F1
also foresaw the potential for those threats to be transformed into business opportunities. In
line with Aschemann-Witzel et al. (2016), the firm management’s philosophy of turning
problems into innovative solutions became apparent, seeking to address several social issues
while at the same time benefit the firm’s bottom line: …So, we invested in this processing
facility… On-site observations confirmed that the equipment includes latest technologies to
process and tenderise foods, which, in the case of consumers in the age care group, could
have significant positive implications. The project, developed over a three-year period, and
now in its final stages, encompasses the use of local products, including the product the firm
markets, as well as other local produce, to produce foods for the elderly population.

Firm 2
F2P2’s comments underline the potential for the firm to contribute to society in various forms
while benefiting financially, again, highlighting the significance of ‘entrepreneurial CSR’ as a
business philosophy. Before working at the firm, F2P2 had already been introduced to its
philosophy, which was a fundamental reason for joining the firm: “That was not my plan, but
when I looked at this business everything I believe in is here …” Earlier on in his life, and by
doing consulting work for the current firm, F2P2 became familiar with its way of operating:
“along the way I met this firm… they were one of my favourite clients. I just liked what they
stood for, and what they were trying to do.”

The participant referred to the nature of the business, stating that it generates revenue at both
ends of the business spectrum, first, by taking waste (green waste, oil waste), and second, by
transforming waste into compost, which is then sold as, for instance, as organic matter for
farms. By taking waste that otherwise might take up landfill space, the firm is aligning with
socially responsible practices.

Moreover, the intrinsic aspects related to the firm’s philosophy initially motivated the
participant to become part of the firm in the role of chief executive officer; these intrinsic
aspects eventually merged with those of an extrinsic nature. Indeed, the notion of the ‘triple-
9
 bottom-line’, which essentially implies that ultimate success for a corporation not only can be
measured by financial, but also by environmental, or social/ethical performance (Norman and
McDonald, 2004), were underlying motivational factors.

Furthermore, environmentally friendly practices not only can provide benefits for the
environment and society, but also improve the firm’s finances (F2P2): “One of the main
reasons why I took this job on…[is] because if I can be part of bringing compost grand scale
to broad agriculture, I can fundamentally change… the impact, probability, and health of
crops…” This finding is in clear contrast to that of studies revealing external pressures
(García Sánchez et al., 2014; Hond et al., 2014; Tate et al., 2014) as key motives to become
engaged in CSR practices. Essentially, firm’s management took the initiative in such
practices, and maximised business opportunities aligned with their bottom line, while
contributing to the overall good of their community or society. Importantly, the participant
noted that the firm has been profitable for nearly two decades, clearly highlighting the
Downloaded by Washington University in St Louis At 11:50 02 July 2018 (PT)

opportunities for owners/managers to reconcile both CSR and financial goals.

F2P2 also reflected on the leadership role of the two founders of the firm in two different
areas, explaining that one co-founder is a ‘world-class pragmatist’, grew up on a farm, and
has a practical attitude concerning business management, the other is a ‘world-class scientist’,
who possesses a wealth of scientific knowledge. After initially meeting, the two founders
started the business with two other people; after slow or static growth for many years, in 2014
the firm doubled its size in number of employees, and also grew 50% in terms of capacity.
These latest developments again demonstrate the entrepreneurial attitude of the firm’s
management, including F2P2, the significance of such human resources in tapping into
opportunities while at the same time contributing to society; as F2P2 commented: “So the
whole notion of sustainability is: let’s try and make the world a better place, take better care
of people, and make as much money, or more money… as we can. What a powerful idea…”

Firm 3
Different aspects associated with entrepreneurship and entrepreneurs’ characteristics (Gartner,
1990, Lumpkin and Dess, 1996; Schumpeter, 1934; Sweezy, 1943) clearly play a role in Firm
3’s activities, again, illustrating strong associations with entrepreneurial CSR. First, F3P1
used the term ‘from cradle to grave’ to describe the firm management’s proactive strategy to
have control over the entire product supply chain, from the moment the mineral is extracted
from the ground to the moment it is sold, and, more recently, to recycle the used final product,
enabling its reuse: “It is very unusual for a mining company to be involved in every stage,
from the production to the end use basically… we are offering the [mineral] a second ‘lease’
of life. And we are the only [mineral] mining company that is supplying that service at the
moment. It [the product] used to go to the landfill beforehand.”

Second, according to F3P2, the firm’s management proactively initiated the recycling
alternative; when recycling the used product through an innovative process, “what comes out
at the other end is still a reasonable product… in some instances it can be a better product
than the virgin…” The process demands financial and human resource investments; however,
for the firm, as well as for customers, it is a win-win situation (F3P2). Previous research
(Green and Peloza, 2011) suggests that CSR practices can provide emotional, functional, and
social. Firm 3’s initiatives align with notion of functional value, namely, “aspects of CSR that
relate to the actual benefit the consumer receives from the product or service” (Green and
Peloza, 2011, p. 50).

10
 Furthermore, Firm 3 provides various options for the recycling of the mineral. For instance, if
geographical proximity allows, firm staff can collect the spent product from customers, and
process it at the firm’s facilities; alternatively, customers can use mobile recycling plants. In
this second option, customers can self-process the spent product through the recycling device,
and collect the recycled part of the product at the other end, with the possibility of reusing it
‘real time’ (F3P2).

Third, this added service represents a further extension- of its supply chain, with clear
strategic implications, for example, in terms of decreasing the threat of duplication by
potential competitors. The end results of this innovative activity are increasing revenues,
additional services; practical, adding value to customers’ investments, and environmental.
F3P1 explained that the firm’s management supported this new innovative CSR related
initiative, with the CEO having a very keen interest in investing in technology; the move was
also perceived as enhancing the image of the firm: “… the mining companies are always seen
Downloaded by Washington University in St Louis At 11:50 02 July 2018 (PT)

as a bit of a negative blob in terms of pollution.”

Moreover, F3P1 underlined the critical strategic value of the recycling initiative for the firm,
and overall for the firm’s customers, some of which are larger organisations whose
management are obviously interested in having ‘peace of mind’ by minimising the threat of
publicly damaging their image: “it [the recycling] has general benefits…we are the only ones
who can provide the service, and it gives a tick in many boxes of larger organisations… they
obviously like being able to leave someone else with the rubbish to deal with.”

Firm 4
The case of Firm 4 also underlines strong links between its CRS related initiatives and
entrepreneurial CSR. First, F4P4 reflected on the very fast developments and transformations
occurring within his firm since 2006. In particular, the firm has experienced a significant,
five-fold growth, which has continued at a rate of 25% per year, even during the global
financial crisis. The financing for this ‘extreme growth’, as F4P4 labelled it, is fully
undertaken by the firm, which also suggest that organisational growth has been accompanied
by financial success.

F4P4 also explained that the firm’s management are significantly committing to CSR. One
investment stream is the recent establishment of an alliance with an international university of
world-class reputation to tackle a massive social issue: “We are looking at starting investing
in research around the problem of urban migration; 2.5 billion people in the next 15 years
are expected to migrate from rural areas of developing countries into cities…typically they
will go into slums.” Despite the vital importance of CSR and urban development, research by
Werna (2009) acknowledged a gap in the literature. At the same time, Werna (2009) provides
a very compelling argument for CSR initiatives to find ways to minimise this contemporary
phenomenon. Essentially, the rapid expansion of the urban population has led to coin the 21st
century, the ‘urban century’. This problem is more accentuated in developing regions of the
world, and its tendency is to continue outgrowing rural populations (Werna, 2009), with a
number of resulting implications in terms of increasing demands for housing, sanitation,
electricity, and other basic needs.

The nearly one million-dollar yearly investment of F4P4 ’takes the form of sending a group of
the firm’s best architectural designers for a week twice a year to conduct a joint study with the
university and find ways to tackle mass urban migration (F4P4): “this… problem is… so huge
that if we keep doing it… in this next 15 year term it will add another 50% to the carbon
11
 footprint... Governments have been abrogating their responsibility, and I think actually our
profession has also been abrogating its responsibility.”

F4P4 also acknowledged that personal and commercial advantages align in meeting social
responsibility: “… when I sell an idea like this to my board [of directors], I sell it as both a
commercial opportunity and a social responsibility agenda. I convince them that the
investment of a million dollars will return its value three times…”

Moreover, through the firm’s involvement in CSR initiative, the participant recognised semi-
tangible benefits such as branding, or strengthening associations with international
organisations, enhancing the firm’s international presence, its capacity and networking
capabilities, and potential future commercial opportunities. Indeed, when referring to the
intangible value that could also be gained through CSR initiatives, F4P4 mentioned:
“learning more, intelligence of the practice will grow; we well do projects with great people,
Downloaded by Washington University in St Louis At 11:50 02 July 2018 (PT)

which grows the culture of the practice…” Firm 4’s gained benefits are therefore clearly
aligned with Branco and Rodrigues’s (2006) argument that “From a resource-based
perspective CSR is seen as providing internal or external benefits, or both (p. 111).

Discussion
RQ3: How RBV and role theory help explain CSR
Baron (2001) posits that when firms’ “motivation is to serve society at the cost of profits” (p.
1481), then actions are deemed socially responsible (CSR). However, when serving the
bottom line is the firms’ main motivation, then actions are privately responsible (Baron,
2001). When strategic CSR is applied, firms are mainly motivated by profits; hence, they
adopt socially responsible practices because they may increase demands for their products or
decrease costs (Baron, 2001). Thus, strategic CSR represents a mere profit maximisation
strategy driven by firms’ self-interest, as opposed to by a notion of CSR (Baron, 2001). In
contrast, the cases of the four firms illustrate that motivations for engaging in ‘entrepreneurial
CSR’ are only marginally associated with the fundamental notion of CSR, or with that of
strategic CSR.

Instead, the findings are strongly aligned with different conceptualisations of

entrepreneurship, and characteristics of entrepreneurs, including an innovative mindset and
execution capability, and are therefore within the theoretical construct of entrepreneurial CSR.
Strong alignment is also identified between the findings concerning entrepreneurial CSR and
the RBV of the firm; a conceptualisation of the alignments is illustrated in Figure 1. First, the
‘valuable’ attribute appears to fit, in that, as opposed to developing strategies to gain in
efficiency or effectiveness (Barney, 1991), firms are gaining in the number of offerings or
alternatives, thus, increase their repertoire of products, services or both (Firm 1). All four
firm’s developed CSR related resources also have a degree of uniqueness. In particular, firms
possess human and natural resources in the form of forward-thinking individuals who
combine both CSR and entrepreneurship principles (Firm 1), or are complemented by unique
products that also offer competitive advantage (Firm 3), and are clearly difficult to copy by
potential competitors.

Similarly, the four firms’ resources are distinctively imperfectly imitable. Indeed, the time
since the firms were established provides a certain degree of advantage, namely, in gaining
exposure, market share, recognition, or in cementing networks and associations while further
developing business and entrepreneurial CSR related strategies. Finally, concerning firms’
entrepreneurial CSR in the context of non-substitutability, the association of this attribute
12
 appears to be less clear, particularly as both the time the current owners/managers may be
active in their firms, and the managerial resources of competitors are unknown. Provided the
firms are led by a succession of like-minded individuals, entrepreneurial CSR strategies will
continue to be at the core of their sustained competitive advantage. Consequently, these
strategies will neutralise the threat of substitutability between the four firms and competitors.

Figure 1 Here

Several associations between the findings and role theory are also noted. First, behavioural
characteristics of an entrepreneur (Sweezy, 1943), characteristics of an enterprise
(Schumpeter, 1934), and the entrepreneurial environment, which can arguably be considered
as a social stable system where members might be encouraged to conform to the system
(Biddle, 1986), identify an association with the functional perspective.
Downloaded by Washington University in St Louis At 11:50 02 July 2018 (PT)

Second, the symbolic interactionist perspective is illustrated in the role of social actors, in this
case the entrepreneurs, some of whom are firm owners or managers. Such role clearly entails
social interactions (Biddle, 1986), including in the form of negotiations, for instance,
communicating with suppliers or staff when investing in resources. Aligned with Biddle’s
(1986) discussion, social actors’ role can also take the form of subscribing to certain attitudes
and norms, including the display of emotions during negotiations or when executing firm
related decisions, such as entrepreneurial CSR initiatives.

Third, concerning the structural perspective, social structures and social statuses defined
within the firm or a stable organisation (Biddle, 1986) are clearly illustrated in the findings,
particularly in decision making. Indeed, it could be suggested that the firm owner or manager
of the medium size firms, or both owner/manager and board of directors in the larger firms,
are in a ‘structural’ position to take decisions concerning the firm, in this case entrepreneurial
CSR initiatives. The decisions that originate in roles and/or behaviours from individuals
higher in the firm’s hierarchy are then channelled through the firm, cascading down into other
organisational layers.

Fourth, concerning the organisational perspective, and also related to the structural
perspective, the firm environment can be categorised as hierarchical in different forms,
depending on the size of the firm. Furthermore, based on the findings, the firm environment
regarding entrepreneurial CSR initiatives is task oriented, and initiatives require preplanning
(Firm 1). A similar argument could be made regarding entrepreneurial CSR, whereby the
balancing act of increasing the firm’s wealth, and making a substantial contribution to
community, society or the environment could lead to strains in the medium or long term.

Fifth, the cognitive perspective is demonstrated in the consequences of firm management’s

successful entrepreneurial CSR initiatives. These repercussions may lead to higher
expectations from community/society in future initiatives, in that these initiative have a
stronger impact on the community, or in that more significant investment of resources are
needed- or expected- to increase the impact of such initiatives.

Conclusions
The present investigation used a case study of four firms to examine the extent of
involvement in CSR initiatives, and motivations for such involvement among firm
owners/managers operating in Western Australia. The aspect of entrepreneurial CSR emerges
as a significant finding, whereby managers/owners identify financial benefits that also align
13
 with firm management’s philosophy to engage in socially responsible initiatives. The findings
also align with the two chosen theoretical foundations. Overall, the RBV of the firm proved a
useful tool to gain understanding of firms’ entrepreneurial CSR. For instance, associations
were noticed concerning firms’ valuable, rare, and imperfectly imitable resources. While
information of competitors’ management strategies is unknown, an argument is made that
firms may also possess non-substitutable resources, provided that similar management
strengths and competencies remain in place.

Adopting role theory also helped in clarifying the links between firms’ management and
entrepreneurial CSR. Indeed, and in accordance with Griffin et al.’s (2007) point that the
theory illuminates understanding of work responsibilities in that it incorporates both
organisational context and work behaviour, a clear association was found between
entrepreneurial CSR plans and initiatives, and participants’ role. The fact that most
participants predominantly hold positions high in the firms’ hierarchy is fundamental in terms
Downloaded by Washington University in St Louis At 11:50 02 July 2018 (PT)

of work responsibilities (Griffin et al., 2007). These responsibilities are perceptible in

management’s decision-making process, particularly when deciding to invest resources
associated with entrepreneurial CSR. While these notions are aligned with the symbolic,
structural, and organisational perspectives, overall, alignment was also noticed pertaining to
the functional and cognitive perspectives.

Implications
The apparent reconciliation of both financial objectives and CSR practices, with significant
benefits to be gained by both firm and community/society, has very important implications.
This study demonstrates that management’s entrepreneurial drive, skills, knowledge,
expertise, or strategic strengths can identify substantial opportunities. Moreover, the
investment of resources to develop socially responsible products and services can help
achieve CSR and the firm’s bottom line. This argument also underlines the significance of the
role of managers holding leadership positions, in developing, nurturing, and maintaining an
organisational environment that instils entrepreneurial/innovative practices, as well as
inquisitiveness, research, and trial and error practices.

Firm 1’s comments, among others, illustrate the passionate and committed role of the owner
in ‘problem-solving’ strategies designed to both benefit the firm financially, through new
innovative initiatives, the community and society. Thus, the findings have practical
implications, especially in terms of the significance of instilling or supporting entrepreneurial
behaviour. Such support could extend from merely focusing on financial aspects to also
consider CSR as a value element of a firm’s future business strategy. Guidance and support
could be at firm or school level, where, for instance, talent could be identified and further
developed. Also, the support of those individuals who already demonstrated leadership, and
fulfil a number of entrepreneurial characteristics, including this study’s participants, is critical
as they epitomise the essence and core of entrepreneurial CSR. Again, these individuals might
also be able to help other younger talent to carry on their contribution to firms, community
and society.

In addition, there are theoretical implications resulting from the findings. Indeed, the adoption
of both theoretical frameworks helps clarify the motivation and drive of management in
supporting, planning and executing entrepreneurial CSR initiatives. Role theory contributed to
a clearer understanding of the role of entrepreneurs, or that of firms’ management. Such role
does not only imply their social position, or the directing of their behaviour or role towards
other people in their organisation, but also in managing role conflicts, and encouraging
14
 conformity, and in maintaining stability in the ‘social system’ (Biddle, 1989). These aspects
are crucial in sustaining or improving forward-thinking work environments, where leadership
contributes to innovative practices and their implementation in the form of entrepreneurial
CSR, with clear impacts on firms in terms of sustained competitive advantage.

In this context, the importance of RBV of the firm also arises. Moreover, the theory was a
valuable tool in understanding those firm management’s attributes, including knowledge,
capabilities, and information, that help generate ‘economic rents’ (Conner 1991) from the
execution of CSR related activities, and overall, contribute to firms’ sustained competitive
advantage. Overall implications therefore relate to the usefulness of the individual theories in
guiding and clarifying the relevance of firm resources (RBV), and leadership and
management aspects of ‘social stable systems’ (role theory). However, an argument is also
made regarding the usefulness of replicating this study’s focus, namely, of utilising both
theories to understand associations between resources and the role leaders play in managing
Downloaded by Washington University in St Louis At 11:50 02 July 2018 (PT)

those resources and their organisational environment.

Limitations and Future Research

While authors emphasise the strengths of case study research (Yin, 1981), it is recognised that
the number of participants/firms represents a limitation, and does not allow for cross
regional/industry comparisons. Moreover, only using the cases of four firms prevents from
making broad generalisations based on the findings. However, irrespective of these
limitations, the research, the combination of individual interviews, site visits, and theoretical
research strongly suggests a number of future research opportunities. This type of research
would allow for a deeper understanding of firms’ management, particularly regarding ways in
which resources are exploited, business opportunities identified, and how such opportunities
align with CSR practices, while improving firms’ bottom-line.

In essence, researching a larger number of model firms could help confirm, and strengthen
this study’s findings, or even disconfirm these findings associated with the notion of
entrepreneurial CSR. New and added information could better inform industry, in identifying
‘good’, sustainable and socially responsible practices; government, in also pinpointing model
firms to support them, recognise them, and nurture their talent; educational institutions, in
helping them prepare some of tomorrow’s entrepreneurial leaders. Further consideration
could also be given to both the RBV of the firm and role theory; alternatively, one of these
theories could be adopted with a different theoretical framework. Doing so could not only
help illuminate the research community and industry concerning entrepreneurial CSR, but
also further contribute to theory development.

References
ABS (2014),“Western Australia at a glance, 2014”, available at:
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/1306.5main+features42014
(accessed July 3, 2016).
ABS (2001), “Small business in Australia”, available at:
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/1321.0 (accessed July 3, 2016).
Aschemann-Witzel, J., de Hooge, I. and Normann, A. (2016), “Consumer-related food waste:
Role of food marketing and retailers and potential for action”, Journal of International
Food and Agribusiness Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 271-285.
Barnett, M.L. (2007), “Stakeholder influence capacity and the variability of financial returns
to corporate social responsibility”, The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 32 No.
3, pp. 794-816.
15
 Barney, J. (1991), “Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage”, Journal of
Management, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 99-120.
Barney, J.B., Ketchen, D.J. and Wright, M. (2011), “The future of resource-based theory:
Revitalization or decline?”, Journal of Management, Vol. 37 No. 5, pp. 1299-1315.
Baron, D.P. (2001), “Private politics, corporate social responsibility, and integrated strategy”,
Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 7-45.
Baxter, P. and Jack, S. (2008), “Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and
implementation for novice researchers”, The Qualitative Report, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp.
544-559.
Biddle, B.J. (1986), “Recent development in role theory”, Annual Review of Sociology, Vol.
12, pp. 67-92.
Brammer, S. and Millington, A. (2008), “Does it pay to be different? An analysis of the
relationship between corporate social and financial performance”, Strategic
Management Journal, Vol. 29 No. 12, pp. 1325-1343.
Downloaded by Washington University in St Louis At 11:50 02 July 2018 (PT)

Branco, M.C. and Rodrigues, L.L. (2006), “Corporate social responsibility and resource-
based perspectives”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 69 No. 2, pp. 111-132.
Burke, L. and Logsdon, J.M. (1997), “How corporate social responsibility pays off”, Long
Range Planning, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 495-502.
Cavaye, A.L.M. (1996), “Case study research: a multi-faceted research approach for IS”,
Information Systems Journal, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 227-242.
Daft, R. (1983), Organization theory and design, West: New York.
Darke, P., Shanks, G. and Broadbent, M. (1998), “Successfully completing case study
research: combining rigour, relevance and pragmatism”, Information Systems Journal,
Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 273-289.
Dierickx, I. and Cool, K. (1989), “Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive
advantage”, Management Science, Vol. 35 No. 12, pp. 1504-1511.
Dyer, W.G. and Whetten, D.A. (2006), “Family firms and social responsibility: Preliminary
evidence from the S&P 500”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 30 No. 6,
pp. 785-802.
Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989), “Building theories from case study research”, Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 532-550.
Eisenhardt, K.M. and Graebner, M.E. (2007), “Theory building from cases: Opportunities and
challenges”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 25-32.
Evans, N. and Sawyer, J. (2010), “CSR and stakeholders of small businesses in regional
South Australia”, Social Responsibility Journal, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 433-451.
Fitzgerald, M.A., Haynes, G.W., Schrank, H.L. and Danes, S. M. (2010), “Socially
responsible processes of small family business owners: Exploratory evidence from the
National Family Business Survey”, Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 48
No. 4, 524-551.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2006), “Five misunderstandings about case-study research”, Quality Inquiry,
Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 219-245.
García Sánchez, I. M., Cuadrado-Ballesteros, B., & Sepúlveda, C. (2014), “Does media
pressure moderate CSR disclosures by external directors?”, Management
Decision, Vol. 52 No. 6, pp. 1014-1045.
Gartner, W.B. (1990), “What are we talking about when we talk about entrepreneurship?”
Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 15-28.
Godos-Díez, J.L., Fernández-Gago, R. and Martínez-Campillo, A. (2011), “How important
are CEOs to CSR practices? An analysis of the mediating effect of the perceived role
of ethics and social responsibility”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 98 No. 4, pp. 531-
548.
16
 Green, T. and Peloza, J. (2011), “How does corporate social responsibility create value for
consumers?”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 48-56.
Griffin, J.J. and Mahon, J.F. (1997), “The corporate social performance and corporate
financial performance debate – Twenty-five years of incomparable research”, Business
Society, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 5-31.
Griffin, M.A., Neal, A. and Parker, S.K. (2007), “A new model of work role performance:
Positive behaviour in uncertain and interdependent contexts”, The Academy of
Management Journal, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 327-347.
Hond, F., Rehbein, K.A., Bakker, F.G. and Lankveld, H.K.V. (2014), “Playing on two
chessboards: Reputation effects between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and
corporate political activity (CPA)”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 51 No. 5, pp.
790-813.
Jacobsen, R. (1988), “The persistence of abnormal returns”, Strategic Management Journal,
Vol. 9 No. 5, pp. 41-58.
Downloaded by Washington University in St Louis At 11:50 02 July 2018 (PT)

Jamali, D., Zanhour, M. and Keshishian, T. (2009), “Peculiar strengths and relational
attributes of SMEs in the context of CSR”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 87 No. 3,
pp. 355-377.
Jones, K. and Bartlett, J.L. (2009), “The strategic value of corporate social responsibility: A
relationship management framework for public relations practice”, PRism, 6(1).
Available at http://eprints.qut.edu.au/20894/1/c20894.pdf (accessed April 12, 2017).
Lumpkin, G.T. and Dess, G.G. (1996), “Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct
and linking it to performance”, The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 21 No. 1,
pp. 135-172.
Margolis, J.D. and Walsh, J.P. (2003), “Misery loves companies: Rethinking social
initiatives by business”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 268-305.
Margolis, J.D. and Walsh, J.P. (2001), People and profits? The search for a link between a
company's social and financial performance, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
Markham, S.K., Ward, S.J., Aiman-Smith, L. and Kingon, A.I. (2010), “The valley of death
as context for role theory in product innovation”, Journal of Production Innovation
Management, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 402-417.
McWilliams, A., Siegel, D.S. and Wright, P.M. (2006), “Corporate social responsibility:
International perspectives”, Journal of Business Strategies, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 1-12.
Mead, G.H. (1934), Mind, self and society, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Neuendorf, K. (2002), The content analysis guidebook, Sage Publications, Inc., Thousand
Oaks, CA.
Norman, W. and MacDonald, C. (2004), “Getting the bottom of ‘triple bottom line’ ”,
Business Ethics Quarterly, 14(2), pp. 243–262.
Noy, C. (2008). Sampling knowledge: The hermeneutics of snowball sampling in qualitative
research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp.
327-344.
Öberseder, M., Schlegelmilch, B.B. and Gruber, V. (2011), “Why don’t consumers care about
CSR?”: A qualitative study exploring the role of CSR in consumption decisions”,
Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 104 No. 4, pp. 449-460.
Perrini, F., Russo, A. and Tencati, A. (2007), “CSR strategies of SMES and large firms.
Evidence from Italy”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 74 No. 3, pp. 285-300.
Peteraf, M.A. (1993), “The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource-based view”,
Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 179-191.
Porter, M. (1985), Competitive advantage, Free Press, New York.
Russo, A. and Tencati, A. (2009), “Formal vs. informal CSR strategies: Evidence from Italian

17
 micro, small, medium-sized, and large firms”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 85 No.
2, pp. 339-353.
Scherer, A.G. and Palazzo, G. (2011) “The new political role of business in a globalized
world: A review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm,
governance, and democracy”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 48 No. 4, pp. 899-
931.
Schumpeter, J. (1939), Business cycles: A theoretical, historical and statistical analysis of
capitalist process, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Stoian, C. and Gilman, M. (2017), “Corporate social responsibility that “pays”: A strategic
approach to CSR for SMEs”, Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 55 No. 1,
pp. 5-31.
Sweezy, P.M. (1943), “Professor Schumpeter’s theory of innovation”, The Review of
Economics and Statistics, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 93-96.
Tate, W. L., Ellram, L.M. and Kirchoff, J. F. (2010), “Corporate social responsibility reports:
Downloaded by Washington University in St Louis At 11:50 02 July 2018 (PT)

a thematic analysis related to supply chain management”, Journal of Supply Chain

Management, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 19-44.
Torugsa, N.A., O’Donohue, W. and Hecker, R. (2013), “Proactive CSR: An empirical
analysis of the role of its economic, social and environmental dimensions on the
association between capabilities and performance”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol.
115 No. 2, pp. 383-402.
Wacker, J.G. (1998), “A definition of theory: research guidelines for different theory-building
research methods in operations management”, Journal of Operations Management,
Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 361-385.
Wehner, L.E. and Thies, C.G. (2014), “Role theory, narratives, and interpretation: the
domestic contestation of roles”, International Studies Review, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 411-
436.
Werna, E. (2009). Urban development. In E. Werna, R. Keivani, and D. Murphy (eds.),
Corporate social responsibility and urban development (pp. 34-51). Palgrave
Macmillan, Basingstoke, UK.
Yin, R.K. (1981), “The case study crisis: Some answers”, Administrative Science Quarterly,
Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 58-65.

18
 Figure 1: The RBV of the firm, role theory, and entrepreneurial CSR

The firms Role theory

RBV of the firm

Functional

Valuable Symbolic
interactionist
Rare
Functional
Imperfectly
Organisational
Downloaded by Washington University in St Louis At 11:50 02 July 2018 (PT)

imitable

(Non) Cognitive
substitutable

Local community,
society

Firms’ competitive,
sustained competitive
advantage

Implications Entrepreneurial CSR

 Table 1: Participants’ demographic information

Participant Years at firm Nationality Industry Staff

F1P1 12 Australian Food production, packing, export <40
F2P2 6 Australian Waste management, compost <40
F3P1 11 German Mineral extraction, export, recycling 300
F3P2 12 Australian Mineral extraction, export, recycling 300
F4P4 11 Australian Architecture services >1000
Downloaded by Washington University in St Louis At 11:50 02 July 2018 (PT)