download corel videostudio pro x6 full crack keygen
Fast & Simple Way to Download Free Software
diablo 2 1 13 patch download macfree download software camfrog pro 5 5download speed up my pc windows 7cubase 5 1 free download
Jean B. McGuire Alison Sundgren and Thomas Schneeweis
presents ground breaking research that gives readers which has a forecast for brand spanking new management thoughts and techniques. All articles published inside journal must come up with a strong empirical and/or theoretical contribution. All empirical methods including and not limited to qualitative, quantitative, or combination methods are represented. Articles published from the journal are clearly strongly related to management theory and employ and identify both a compelling practical management issue along with a strong theoretical framework for addressing it. For more than forty years the journal may be recognized as indispensable reading for management scholars. The journal continues to be cited in these forums as
The journal is published six times per year which has a circulation of 15, 000.
The moving wall represents the period of time between the last issue accessible in JSTOR as well as the most recently published issue of your journal. Moving walls are likely to be represented in years. In rare instances, a publisher has elected to possess a zero moving wall, so their current issues are accessible in JSTOR soon there after publication.
Note: In calculating the moving wall, the present year just isn't counted.
For example, if the latest year is 2008 plus a journal carries a 5 year moving wall, articles in the year 2002 are offered.
Fixed walls: Journals without new volumes being included with the archive.
Absorbed: Journals which are combined with another title.
Complete: Journals which can be no longer published or that have been along with another title.
You aren't currently logged in.
You have javascript disabled.
Using Fortune magazines ratings of corporate reputations, we analyzed the relationships between perceptions of firms corporate social responsibility and measures of these financial performance. Results demonstrate that a firms prior performance, assessed by both stock-market returns and accounting-based measures, is a bit more closely associated with corporate social responsibility than is subsequent performance. Results also show measures of risk will be more closely connected with social responsibility than previous numerous studies have suggested.
This item contains 42 references.
Aaker, D., Jacobson, R. 1987. The role of risk in explaining differences in profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 30: 277-296.
Abbott, , Monsen, R. 1979. On the measurement of corporate social responsibility: Self-reported disclosure to be a measure of corporate social involvement. Academy of Man- agement Journal, 22: 501-515.
Alexander, G., Bucholtz, R. 1978. Corporate social responsibility and wall street game performance. Academy of Management Journal, 21: 479-486.
Anderson, , Frankel, A. W. 1980. Voluntary social reporting: An isobeta portfolio analysis. Accounting Review, 55: 467-479.
Arlow, P., Gannon, M. 1982. Social responsiveness, corporate structure, and economic performance. Academy of Management Review, 7: 235-241.
Aupperle, K., Carroll, A., Hatfield, J. 1985. An empirical examination of the partnership between corporate social responsibility and profitability. Academy of Management Jour- nal, 28: 446-463.
Bowman, E., Haire, M. 1975. A strategic posture towards CSR. California Management Review, 182: 49-58.
Bradgon, , Marlin, J. 1972. Is pollution profitable? Risk Management, 194: 9-18.
Branch, B.1983. Misleading accounting: The danger plus the potential. Working paper, Uni- versity of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Briloff, R.1972. Unaccountable accounting. New York: Harper Row.
Briloff, R.1976. The truth about corporate accounting. New York: Harper Row.
Carroll, 1979. A three-dimensional conceptual type of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 4: 497-505.
Chakravarthy, B.1986. Measuring strategic performance. Strategic Management Journal, 7: 437-458.
Cochran, P., Wood, R. 1984. Corporate social responsibility and financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 27: 42-56.
Cornell, B., Shapiro, A. 1987. Corporate stakeholders and corporate finance. Financal Man- agement, 16: 5-14.
Council on Economic Priorities. 1987. Rating Americans corporate conscience. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley
Cyert, , March, J. G. 1963. A behavioral theory in the firm. Englewood Cliffs, : Prentice-Hall.
Davidson, , Worrell, , Gilberton, D. 1986. The appropriateness of employing accounting data in studies relating corporate social responsibility to firm financial performance. Paper presented for the Academy of Management annual meeting, Chicago.
Folger, H., Nutt, F. 1975. A note on social responsibility and stock valuation. Academy of Management Journal, 18: 155-159.
Fortune1983. Ranking Americas corporations. 1071: 34-44.
Fortune1986. Americans most admired corporations. 1131: 18-27.
Lubatkin, M., Shrieves, R. 1986. Towards a reconciliation of market performance measures to strategic management research. Academy of Management Review, 11: 497-512.
McGuire, J., Schneeweis, T., Branch, B. 1986. A comparison of alternative measures of corporate performance. Unpublished manuscript, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
McGuire, J., Schneeweis, T., Branch, B. 1987. Perceptions of management quality and firm financial performance. Unpublished manuscript, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
McGuire, J., Schneeweis, T., Hill, J. 1986. An analysis of alternative measures of strategic performance. In R. Lamb P. Stravastava Eds., Advances in strategic management, vol. 4: 107-153. Greenwich, Conn.: JAI Press.
Michel, A., Shaked, I. 1984. Does business diversification affect performance? Financial Management, 122: 18-25.
Moskowitz, M.1972. Choosing socially responsible stocks. Business and Society, 1: 71-75.
Moskowitz, M.1975. Profiles in corporate social responsibility. Business and Society, 13: 29-42.
Moussavi, F., Evans, D. 1986. An attributional method of measuring corporate social performance. Paper presented for the Academy of Management meetings, San Diego.
Parket, R., Eibert, H. 1975. Social responsibility: The underlying factors. Business Horizons, 18: 5-10.
Pfeffer, J., Salancik, G. 1978. The external management of organizations. New York: Harper Row.
Preston, 1978. Analyzing corporate social performance: Methods and results. Journal of Contemporary Business, 7: 135-149.
Quinn, J., Mintzberg, H., James, R. 1987. The strategy process. Englewood Cliffs, : Prentice-Hall.
Soloman, R., Hansen, K. 1985. Its good business. New York: Atheneum.
Spicer, 1978. Investors, corporate social performance, and knowledge disclosure: An empirical study. Accounting Review, 53: 94-111.
Sturdivant, , Ginter, J. L. 1977. Corporate social responsiveness. California Management Review, 193: 30-39.
Ullmann, A.1985. Data in search of an theory: A critical examination in the relationships among social performance, social disclosure, and economic performance. Academy of Manage- ment Review, 10: 540-577.
Vance, S.1975. Are socially responsible firms good investment risks? Management Review, 64: 18-24.
Wartick, S.1987. The contribution of issues management to corporate performance. Paper presented on the Academy of Management meetings, New Orleans.
JSTOR is an element of ITHAKA, a not-for-profit organization enhancing the academic community use digital technologies to preserve the scholarly record also to advance research and teaching in sustainable ways.
2000-2016 ITHAKA. All Rights Reserved. JSTOR, the JSTOR logo, JPASS, and ITHAKA are registered trademarks of ITHAKA.
Gregg A. Jarrell James A. Brickley and Jeffry M. Netter
Content just for this title is released right after the latest issues become offered to JSTOR.
In order to preview this item and examine access options please enable javascript.
Read this item online with free streaming by registering for the MyJSTOR account.
Register to get a MyJSTOR account.
Add around 3 free circumstances to your shelf.
Items put into your shelf is easy to remove after fourteen days.
Think you ought to have access to this item via your institution? Login
Purchase this information for 10.00 USD
Check out employing a credit card or bank-account with PayPal.
Download the PDF from the link with your email or from the MyJSTOR account.
Access supplemental materials and multimedia.
Unlimited usage of purchased articles.
Ability to save lots of and export citations.
Custom alerts when new content articles are added.
Screen reader users, click this link to load entire article This page uses JavaScript to progressively load this content content being a user scrolls. Screen reader users, go through the load entire article button to bypass dynamically loaded articles and reviews.
Please remember that Internet Explorer version 8.x will never be supported adjusted January 1, 2016. Please reference this blog post for additional information. Close
RIS for EndNote, Reference Manager, ProCite
JavaScript is disabled on the browser.
Please enable JavaScript to utilize all the features on this site.
JavaScript is disabled with your browser. Please enable JavaScript make use of all the features here. This page uses JavaScript to progressively load this content content to be a user scrolls. Click the View full text url to bypass dynamically loaded content articles. View full text
Department of Economics, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1477, USA
Harvard Business School, Harvard University, Boston, MA 02163, USA
Accepted 22 June 2001, Available online 28 September 2001
This paper investigates the relation between your ownership structure as well as the performance of corporations if ownership is created multi-dimensional and as well is treated just as one endogenous variable. To our knowledge, no prior study has treated the organization control problem that way. We find no statistically significant relation between ownership structure and firm performance. This finding is in conjuction with the view that diffuse ownership, whilst it may exacerbate some agency problems, also yields compensating advantages that generally offset such problems. Consequently, for data that reflect market-mediated ownership structures, no systematic relation between ownership structure and firm performance is to be expected.
Corresponding author. Tel.: 1-310-825-3651
Copyright 2001 Elsevier Science All rights reserved.
Copyright 2016 Elsevier or its licensors or contributors. ScienceDirect is often a registered trademark of Elsevier
Cookies are employed by this site. To decline or discover more, visit our Cookies page.
This article will never be cited.
2015 download corel videostudio pro x6 full crack keygen