The Impact of Corporate Strategic Deviance on ESG Performance: Evidence from Chinese Listed Companies

Authors

  • Xiwei Wang

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.62051/ijgem.v3n3.32

Keywords:

Corporate strategic deviance, ESG performance, Resource tightness

Abstract

This study examines the relationship between corporate strategic deviance and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance using a sample of listed A-share companies in Shanghai and Shenzhen from 2010 to 2020. The findings reveal that companies with a higher degree of strategic deviance tend to exhibit poorer ESG performance. This result still holds after a series of robustness tests. Furthermore, the study conducts heterogeneity analysis and uncovers that non-state-owned companies, those with lower managerial capacity companies are more vulnerable to the negative effects of strategic deviance on ESG performance.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abeysekera, A. P., & Fernando, C. S. (2020). Corporate social responsibility versus corporate shareholder responsibility: A family firm perspective. Journal of Corporate Finance, 61, 101370.

Aupperle, K. E., Carroll, A. B., & Hatfield, J. D. (1985). An empirical examination of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and profitability. Academy of management Journal, 28(2), 446-463.

Bancel, F., & Mittoo, U. R. (2011). Financial flexibility and the impact of the global financial crisis: Evidence from France. International Journal of Managerial Finance, 7(2), 179-216.

Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of management, 17(1), 99-120.

Baron, R.M., Kenny, & D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.

Baum, J. A., & Mezias, S. J. (1992). Localized competition and organizational failure in the Manhattan hotel industry, 1898-1990. Administrative science quarterly, 580-604.

Baum, J. A., & Oliver, C. (1991). Institutional linkages and organizational mortality. Administrative science quarterly, 187-218.

Bi, X., Zhai, S., & Jiang, B. (2017). The impact of government subsidies and financial redundancy on dual innovation of high-tech enterprises. Accounting Research (01), 46-52+95.

Borghesi, R., Houston, J. F., & Naranjo, A. (2014). Corporate socially responsible investments: CEO altruism, reputation, and shareholder interests. Journal of Corporate Finance, 26, 164-181.

Boubakri, N., Guedhami, O., Kwok, C. C., & Wang, H. H. (2019). Is privatization a socially responsible reform? Journal of corporate finance, 56, 129-151.

Carpenter, M. A. (2000). The price of change: The role of CEO compensation in strategic variation and deviation from industry strategy norms. Journal of Management, 26(6), 1179-1198.

Chen, M., & Miller, D. 1994. Competitive attack, retaliation and performance. Strategic Management Journal,15, 85–102.

Chen, T., Dong, H., & Lin, C. (2020). Institutional shareholders and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Financial Economics, 135(2), 483-504.

Deephouse, D. L. (1996).‘Does isomorphism legitimate?’. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1024-39.

Deephouse, D. L. (1999). ‘To be different, or to be the same? It's a question (and theory) of strategic balance’. Strategic Management Journal, 20, 147– 66.

Demerjian, P., Lev, B., & McVay, S. (2012). Quantifying managerial ability: A new measure and validity tests. Management science, 58(7), 1229-1248.

Di Giuli, A., & Kostovetsky, L. (2014). Are red or blue companies more likely to go green? Politics and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Financial Economics, 111(1), 158-180.

DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American sociological review, 147-160.

Finkelstein, S., Hambrick, D.C., 1990. Top-management-team tenure and organizational outcomes: The moderating role of managerial discretion. Administrative Science Quarterly 35 (3), 484-503.

Geletkanycz, M. A., & Hambrick, D. C. (1997). The external ties of top executives: Implications for strategic choice and performance. Administrative science quarterly, 654-681.

Gillan, S., Sekerci, N. S., & Starks, L. (2020). Do firms cater to demand for environmental and social performance. Unpublished working paper.

Downloads

Published

28-07-2024

Issue

Section

Arcicles

How to Cite

Wang, X. (2024). The Impact of Corporate Strategic Deviance on ESG Performance: Evidence from Chinese Listed Companies. International Journal of Global Economics and Management, 3(3), 280-293. https://doi.org/10.62051/ijgem.v3n3.32