Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

CSR Policies: Effects on Labour Productivity in Spanish Micro and Small Manufacturing Companies

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper analyses empirical evidence of efforts to enable Spanish micro and small manufacturing companies to boost their labour productivity rates through the development of the main pillars of their corporate social responsibility (CSR) policies. This study aims to develop new approaches and sensibilities towards work from an ethical, values (virtues) and CSR perspective, showing how internal dimensions of CSR, such those related to relationships with employees and responsibility in processes and product quality, can improve labour performance and labour efficiency, thereby contributing to a better society. The results of a sample of 929 small businesses indicate that the social responsibility policies that most contributed to a short-term increase in labour productivity are those related to internal aspects of the company, in particular its involvement in the quality of processes and products, promotion of innovation and employee care. However, the impact on labour productivity of CSR policies related to external factors, such as relationship with stakeholders and environmental concern, could not be empirically proven in this paper.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. This paper has included these control variables, given that the sample is made up of small companies belonging to the industrial sector.

  2. By definition, the dependent variable (SA) (sales/employee) will have a negative relationship with the variable (VAL) (labour costs/sales) because the numerator of the dependent variable is the denominator of the independent variable. Because labour costs and employees are highly correlated and because production and sales are highly correlated, the same is true for the dependent variable (PE). In order to prove that the statistical result is due to the underlying hypothesized H2 relationship and not the above-mentioned arithmetic variable definition, we tested the model with the Labour Costs variable instead of the VAL variable. The results obtained with the Labour Costs variable were also significant.

Abbreviations

CFP:

Corporate financial performance

CSP:

Corporate social performance

CSR:

Corporate social responsibility

ESEE:

Encuesta sobre Estrategias Empresariales (Survey on Business Strategy)

GDP:

Gross domestic product

GVA:

Gross value added

MBA:

Master in Business Administration

R&D:

Research & Development

SEPI:

Sociedad Estatal de Participaciones Industriales (National holding for share portfolio in industry)

SMEs:

Small- and medium-sized enterprises

UK:

United Kingdom

References

  • Albinger, H. S., & Freeman, S. J. (2000). Corporate social performance and attractiveness as an employer to different job seeking populations. Journal of Business Ethics, 28(3), 243–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allouche, J., & Laroche, P. (2005). A meta-analytical investigation of the relationship between corporate social and financial performance. Revue De Gestion Des Ressources Humaines, 57, 18–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Axelrod, R. (1984). The evolution of cooperation. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Axelrod, R., & Cohen, M. D. (1999). Harnessing complexity. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. B., & Hansen, M. H. (1994). Trustworthiness as a source of competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 15, 175–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumont, C. (1997). Croissance endogène et espace. In F. Céliméne & C. Lacour (Eds.), L’intégration régionale des espace (pp. 33–61). Paris: Economica.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becchetti, L., & Trovato, G. (2011). Corporate social responsibility and firm efficiency: A latent class stochastic frontier analysis. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 36(3), 231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benito-Hernández, S., Platero Jaime, M., & Rodríguez Duarte, A. (2012). Determinants of innovation in Spanish microenterprises: The importance of internal factors. Universia Business Review, 1, 104–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, H. R. (1953). Social responsibilities of the businessman. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Branco, M. C., & Rodriguez, L. L. (2006). Corporate social responsibility and resource-based perspectives. Journal of Business Ethics, 69(2), 111–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, L., & Logsdon, J. M. (1996). How corporate social responsibility pays off. Longe Range Planning, 29(4), 495–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callejón, M. (2002). Implicaciones de las nuevas teorías del crecimiento y la localización en las políticas regionales y locales. Capítulo del libro electrónico: La Política Económica en un Mundo de Incertidumbre. V Jornadas de Política Económica. General Media. S.L. Bilbao.

  • Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Journal, 4(4), 497–505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapple, W., Morrison Paul, C. J., & Harris, R. (2005). Manufacturing and corporate environmental responsibility: Cost implications of voluntary waste minimisation. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 16, 347–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chatterji, M., & Tilley, C. J. (2002). Sickness, absenteeism, ‘presenteeism’ and sick pay. Oxford Economic Papers, 54(4), 669–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ciccone, A. (2002). Agglomeration effects in Europe. European Economic Review, 46, 213–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson, M. B. E. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 92–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission of the European Communities. (2001). Green paper. Promoting a European framework for corporate social responsibility, COM 2001 (pp. 366–end), 18.07.2001. Brussels: Commission of the European Community. Accessed March 10, 2010, from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2001:0366:FIN:ES:PDF.

  • de Bakker, F. G., Groenewegen, P., & Den Hond, F. (2005). A bibliometric analysis of 30 years of research and theory on corporate social responsibility and corporate social performance. Business & Society, 44(3), 283–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Schutter, O. (2008). Corporate social responsibility European style. European Law Journal, 14, 203–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Del Brío, J. A., & Junquera, B. (2003). A review of the literature on environmental innovation management in SMEs: Implications for public policies. Technovation, 23(12), 939–948.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dowell, G., Stuart, H., & Bernard, Y. (2000) Do Corporate Environmental Standards Create or Destroy Market Value? Management Science, 46, 1059–1074.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, M. J., & Roy, M. J. (2001). Sustainability in action: Identifying and measuring the key performance drivers. Long Range Planning, 34(5), 585–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2003). Recommendation 2003/361/CE. Accessed May 19, 2012, from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2003:124:0036:0041:es:PDF.

  • European Commission. (2006). Implementing the partnership for growth and jobs: Making Europe a pole of excellence on corporate social responsibility. COM 136. Brussels: European Commission.

  • European Commission. (2008). European competitiveness report. Accessed May 12, 2012, from http://ec.europa.eu/ENTERPRISE/newsroom/cf/_getdocument.cfm?doc_id=4058.

  • European Commission. (2010). European competitiveness report (pp. 22–23). Accessed May 10, 2012, from http://bookshop.europa.eu/en/european-competitiveness-report-2010-pbNBAK10001/.

  • European Commission, DG-ENTERPRISE. (2011). Annual report on EU small and medium sized enterprises 2010/2011. Accessed March 1, 2012, from http://ec.europa.eu/ENTERPRISE/policies/sme/facts-figures-analysis/performance-review/pdf/2010_2011/are_the_eus_smes_recovering.pdf.

  • Fombrun, C. (1996). Reputation: Realizing value from the corporate image. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston/London: Pitman/Ballinger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frooman, J. (1997). Socially irresponsible and illegal behaviour and shareholder wealth. Business and Society, 36, 221–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • García Olaverry, M. C., & Huertas, E. (2012). Influencia sindical en la empresa industrial española. Revista Internacional del trabajo, 130(3–4), 303–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grayson, D. (2004). How CSR contribute to the competitiveness of Europe in a more sustainable world. In The World Bank Institute and the CSR Resource Centre (Netherlands) (pp. 1–5).

  • Grayson, D., & Hodges, A. (2004). Corporate social opportunity! Seven steps to make corporate social responsibility work for your business. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greening, D. W., & Turban, D. B. (2000). Corporate social performance as a competitive advantage in attracting a quality workforce. Business and Society, 39(3), 254–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamel, G., & Prahalad, C. K. (1989). Strategic intent. Harvard Business Review, 3, 63–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, U. (2004). Gesellschaftliche Verantwortung als Business Case: Ansätze, Defizite und Perspektiven der deutschsprachigen Betriebswirtschaftslehre. In U. Schneider & P. Steiner (Eds.), Betriebswirtschaftslehre un Gesellschaftliche Verantwortung: Mit Corporate Social Responsibility zu mehr Engagement (1st ed., pp. 59–83). Wiesbaden, Germany: Gabler Verlag.

  • Heal, G. (2005). Corporate social responsibility: An economic and financial framework. The Geneva papers on risk and insurance. Issues and Practice, 30(3), 387–409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins, M. (2003). The planetary bargain. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaccard, J., & Turrisi, R. (2003). Interaction effects in multiple regression (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, H. (2006). Small business champions for corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 67, 241–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C. (2003). As if business ethics were possible: ‘Within such limits’…. Organization, 10(2), 223–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, T. M. (1995). Instrumental Stakeholder Theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics. The Academy of Management Review, 20(2), 404–437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kay, J. (1993). Foundations of corporate success. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kong, N., Salzmann, O., Steger, U., & Ionescu-Somers, A. (2002). Moving business/industry towards sustainable consumption: The role of NGOs. European Management Journal, 20(2), 109–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, M., Pfizer, M., & Lee, P. (2007). Competitive social responsibility: Uncovering the economic rationale for corporate social responsibility among Danish small- and medium-sized enterprises. Project Report, Copenhagen.

  • Lantos, G. P. (2001). The boundaries of strategic corporate social responsibility. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(2), 595–630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M. D. P. (2008). A review of the theories of corporate social responsibility: Its evolutionary path and the road ahead. International Journal of Management Reviews, 10, 53–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Longo, M., Mura, M., & Bonoli, A. (2005). Corporate social responsibility and corporate performance: The case of Italian SMEs. Corporate Governance, 5, 28–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowell, B. L. (2007). The new metrics of corporate performance: Profit per employee. The McKinsey Quarterly, 1, 56–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maignan, I., Ferrell, O. C. and Hult, T. G. (1999). Corporate citizenship: Cultural antecedents and business benefits. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27, 4, 455-469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malindi, M. (2009). The impact of the economic downturn on productivity growth. Economic & Labour Market Review, 3(6), 18–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margolis, J. D., Elfenbein, H. A., & Walsh, J. P. (2007, August). Does it pay to be good? A meta-analysis and redirection of research on the relationship between corporate social and financial performance. Presentation at the Academy of Management Meetings, Philadelphia, PA.

  • Marín Rives, L., & Rubio Bañón, A. (2008). ¿Moda o factor competitivo? Un estudio empírico de responsabilidad social corporativa en la PYME. Tribuna de Economía, ICE, 842, 177–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maté Sánchez-Val, M. L., et al. (2009). La influencia de los efectos espaciales en el crecimiento de la productividad de la PYME. Estudios de Economía Aplicada, 27(1), 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2000). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: Correlation or misspecification? Strategic Management Journal, 21, 603–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendibil, K., Hernandez, J., Espinach, X., Garriga, E., & Macgregor, S. (2007). How can CSR practices lead to successful innovation in SMEs? Publication from the RESPONSE Project, Strathclyde, 141.

  • Miles, M. P., & Covin, J. G. (2000). Environmental marketing: A source of reputational, competitive, and financial advantage. Journal of Business Ethics, 23, 299–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, M. L., et al. (2008). Efectos del ausentismo en la productividad de los maestros. Revista Internacional del trabajo, 127(1), 79–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Industry, Energy and Tourism of Spain. (2012). Retrato de la PYME (pp. 2–3). Accessed February 8, 2012, from http://estadisticas.ipyme.org/InformesEstadisticos/RetratoPYME2012.pdf.

  • Mintzberg, H. (1983). The case for corporate social responsibility. The Journal of Business Strategy, 4(2), 3–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. (1993). The rise and fall of strategic planning. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohr, L., Webb, D., & Katherine, H. (2001). Do consumers expect companies to be socially responsible? The impact of corporate social responsibility on buying behavior. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 35(1), 45–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, G. (2003). Hives and horseshoes, Mintzberg and Mclntyre: What future for corporate social responsibility? Business Ethics: A European Review, 12, 4–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murths, T. P., & Lenway, S. A. (1998). Country capabilities and the strategic state: How national political institutions affect MNC strategies. Strategic Management Journal, 15(5), 113–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orlitzky, M. (2005). Social responsibility and financial performance: Trade-off or virtuous circle. University of Auckland Business Review, 7, 37–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orlitzky, M., & Benjamin, J. D. (2001). Corporate social performance and firm risk: A meta-analytic review. Business and Society, 40(4), 369–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24(3), 403–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orsato, R (2006). Competitive Environmental Strategies: When Does it Pay to be Green? California Management Review, 48(2), 127–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Podolny, J. M. (1993). A status-based model of market competition. American Journal of Sociology, 98, 829–872.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. (2003). CSR—A religion with too many priests? European Business Forum 15.

  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2002). The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy. Harvard Business Review, 80(12), 56–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M.E. & van der Linde, C. (1995).Toward a New Conception of the Environment-Competitiveness Relationship. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(4), 97–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & van der Linde, C. (1998). Green and competitive. In M. E. Porter (Ed.), On competition (pp. 351–375). MA Boston: Harvard Business Press.

  • Rice, P., & Venables, A. J. (2004). Spatial determinants of productivity, analysis for the regions of Great Britain. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 36(6), 727–752.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, P. W., & Dowling, G. R. (2002). Corporate reputation and sustained superior financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 23(12), 1077–1093.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rondinelli, D. A., & London, T. (2002). Stakeholder and corporate responsibilities in cross-sectoral environmental collaborations: Building value, legitimacy and trust. In J. Andriof, S. Waddock, B. Husted, & S. Sutherland Rahman (Eds.), Unfolding stakeholder thinking: Theory responsibility and engagement (pp. 201–215). Sheffield: Greenleaf.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Russo, M. V., & Fouts, P. A. (1997). A resource based perspective on corporate environmental performance and profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 534–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sauian, M. S. (2002). Labour productivity: An important business strategy in manufacturing. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 13(6), 435.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaltegger, S., & Burritt, R. (2005). Corporate sustainability. In H. Folmer & T. Tietenberg (Eds.), The international yearbook of environmental and resource economics 2005/2006: A survey of current issues (pp. 185–222). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schnietz, K. E., & Epstein, M. J. (2005). Exploring the financial value of reputation for corporate responsibility during a crisis. Corporate Reputation Review, 7(4), 327–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schreck, P. (2011). Reviewing the business case for corporate social responsibility: New evidence and analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 103, 167–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwaiger, M. (2004). Component and parameter of corporate reputation: An empirical study. Schmalenbach Business Review, 56, 46–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 225–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. J. (1999). Does size matter? The state of the art in small business ethics. Business Ethics: A European Review, 8(3), 163–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. J., Jeurissen, R., & Rutherfoord, R. (2000). Small business and the environment in the UK and the Netherlands: Toward stakeholder cooperation. Business Ethics Quarterly, 10(4), 945–965.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. J., & Lozano, J. F. (2000). Communicating about ethics with small firms: Experiences from the U.K. and Spain. Journal of Business Ethics, 27(1), 43–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. J., & Rutherfoord, R. (2001). Social responsibility, profit, maximization and the small firm owner-manager. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 8(2), 126–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. J., & Rutherfoord, R. (2003). Small business and empirical perspectives in business ethics: Editorial. Journal of Business Ethics, 47(1), 1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. J., & Schmidpeter, R. (2003). SMEs, social capital and the common good. Journal of Business Ethics, 45(1–2), 93–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. J., Schmidpeter, R., & Habisch, A. (2003). Assessing Social Capital: Small and medium sized enterprises in Germany and the UK. Journal of Business Ethics, 47(1), 17–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stuebs, M. T., & Sun, L. (2009). Corporate reputation and technical efficiency: Evidence from the chemical and business services industries. Journal of Applied Business Research, 25(5), 21–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stuebs, M. T., & Sun, L. (2010). Business reputation and labour efficiency, productivity, and cost. Journal of Business Ethics, 96, 265–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, A., & Sheffrin, S. M. (2003). Economics: Principles in action. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taymaz, E. (2002). Are small firms really less productive? An analysis of productivity differentials and firms dynamics. Small Business Economics, 25, 429–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J. K., & Smith, H. L. (1991). Social responsibility and small business: Suggestions for research. Journal of Small Business Management, 29(January), 30–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilley, F. (2000). Small firm environmental ethics: How deep do they go? Business Ethics: A European Review, 9(1), 31–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tödtling, F., & Kaufmann, A. (2001). The role of the region for innovation activities of SMEs. European Urban and Regional Studies, 8(3), 203–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toyne, P. (2003, June 15–18). Corporate social responsibilityGood business practice and a source of competitive edge for SMEs? Paper presented at the 48th World conference international council for small business (ICSB): Advancing entrepreneurship and small business, Belfast, Northern Ireland.

  • Turban, D. B., & Greening, D. W. (1997). Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees. Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 658–672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Luijk, H. J. L. (1999). Business ethics in Europe: A tale of two efforts. In R. E. Frederick (Ed.), A companion to business ethics (pp. 353–365). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • van Luijk, H. J. L. (2005). Ética empresarial: ¿Hasta dónde hemos llegado? Una perspectiva europea. ICADE Revista cuatrimestral de las Facultades de Derecho y Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales de la Universidad Pontificia Comillas de Madrid, 64, 11–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vicente Molina, A., et al. (2004). Compatibilidad entre responsabilidad social corporativa y competitividad: estado de la cuestión en el ámbito internacional (pp. 99–100). Basque: Instituto de Economía Aplicada a la empresa, País Vasco University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Viladecans, E., & Costa, M. (1999). Concentración geográfica de la industria e integración económica de España. Economía Industrial, 329, 19–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vilanova, M., Lozano, J., & Arenas, D. (2009). Exploring the nature of the relationship between CSR and competitiveness. Journal of Business Ethics, 87, 57–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vyakarnam, S., Bailey, A., Myers, A., & Burnett, D. (1997). Towards an understanding of ethical behaviour in small firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(15), 1625–1636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance-financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18(4), 303–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wartick, S. L., & Cochran, P. L. (1985). The evolution of the corporate social performance model. Academy of Management Review, 10, 758–769.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M. (2008). The business case for corporate social responsibility: A company-level measurement approach for CSR. European Management Journal, 26, 247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welford, R. (2003). Beyond systems: A vision for corporate environmental management for the future. International Journal of Environment and Sustainable Development, 2, 162–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, D., et al. (2006). Drivers of environmental behaviour in manufacturing SMEs and the implications for CSR. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(3), 317–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, D. J. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16, 691–718.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, D. J. (2010). Measuring corporate social performance: A review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12, 50–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodward, D., Edwards, P., & Birkin, F. (2001). Some evidence on executives’ views of corporate social responsibility. British Accounting Review, 33, 357–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, M. (2006). Corporate social performance, corporate financial performance, and firm size: A meta-analysis. Journal of American Academy of Business, 8(1), 163–171.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pablo Esteban Sánchez.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sánchez, P.E., Benito-Hernández, S. CSR Policies: Effects on Labour Productivity in Spanish Micro and Small Manufacturing Companies. J Bus Ethics 128, 705–724 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1982-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1982-x

Keywords

Navigation