Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Are firms with foreign CEOs better citizens? A study of the impact of CEO foreignness on corporate social performance

  • Research Note
  • Published:
Journal of International Business Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study examines whether firms’ corporate social performance (CSP) varies when local firms have foreign CEOs. Building on the social identity perspective, we argue that because foreign CEOs are perceived as outgroup (or nonprototypical) leaders by the local firms’ stakeholders, local firms with foreign CEOs need to achieve a higher level of CSP than do local firms with local CEOs to enhance their legitimacy and trustworthiness. Furthermore, we propose that the predicted difference in CSP between foreign and local CEO-led firms will be larger (a) for more authentic and thus trust-enhancing CSR activities and (b) in those socio-economic environments where the salience of CEO foreignness and thus the need to build trustworthiness with locals is more pronounced. In a sample of 1001 local firms across 18 developed countries during the period between 2003 and 2015, our empirical results support most of our predictions.

Résumé

Cette étude examine si les performances sociales des entreprises (PSE) varient lorsque des entreprises locales ont des PDG étrangers. En nous basant sur la perspective de l'identité sociale, nous soutenons que parce que les PDG étrangers sont perçus comme des dirigeants hors groupe (ou non prototypiques) par les parties prenantes des entreprises locales, les entreprises locales ayant des PDG étrangers doivent atteindre un niveau de PSE plus élevé que les entreprises locales ayant des PDG locaux pour renforcer leur légitimité et fiabilité. En outre, nous proposons que la différence prédite en matière de PSE entre les entreprises dirigées par des PDG étrangers et des PDG locaux soit plus importante (a) pour les activités de RSE plus authentiques et donc renforçant la confiance et (b) dans les environnements socio-économiques où l'importance de l’origine étrangère des PDG, et donc la nécessité d'établir une relation de confiance avec les locaux, est plus prononcée. Sur un échantillon de 1 001 entreprises locales dans 18 pays développés au cours de la période 2003-2015, nos résultats empiriques confirment la plupart de nos prévisions.

Resumen

Este estudio examina si el desempeño social corporativo (CSP por sus iniciales en inglés) de las empresas varía cuando las empresas locales tienen directores generales (CEOs) extranjeros. Basándonos en la perspectiva de la identidad social, exponemos que debido a que los directores generales extranjeros son percibidos como líderes de fuera del grupo (o no prototípicos) por los grupos de interés de las empresas locales, las empresas locales con directores generales extranjeros necesitan alcanzar un nivel más alto de desempeño social corporativo que las empresas locales con directores generales locales para mejorar su legitimidad y confiabilidad. Además, proponemos que la diferencia prevista en el desempeño social corporativo entre las empresas dirigidas por directores generales extranjeros y locales será mayor (a) para actividades de responsabilidad social corporativa más auténticas y, por lo tanto, que mejoren la confianza y b) en aquellos entornos socioeconómicos en los que la prominencia de la extranjería del director general y, por lo tanto, la necesidad de crear confiabilidad con los lugareños es más pronunciada. En una muestra de 1.001 empresas locales de 18 países desarrollados durante el período comprendido entre 2003 y 2015, nuestros resultados empíricos respaldan la mayoría de nuestras predicciones.

Resumo

Este estudo examina se o desempenho social corporativo (CSP) de empresas varia quando as empresas locais têm CEOs estrangeiros. Com base na perspectiva da identidade social, argumentamos que, porque CEOs estrangeiros são percebidos como líderes de grupos externos (ou não prototípicos) pelos stakeholders de empresas locais, empresas locais com CEOs estrangeiros precisam atingir um nível mais alto de CSP do que empresas locais com CEOs locais para aumentar sua legitimidade e confiabilidade. Além disso, propomos que a diferença prevista no CSP entre empresas lideradas por CEOs estrangeiros e locais será maior (a) para atividades de CSR mais autênticas e, portanto, que aumentem a confiança e (b) naqueles ambientes socioeconômicos onde a saliência do fato de ser estrangeiro do CEO e, portanto, a necessidade de construir confiabilidade com os habitantes locais, é mais pronunciada. Em uma amostra de 1.001 empresas locais em 18 países desenvolvidos durante o período entre 2003 e 2015, nossos resultados empíricos sustentam a maioria de nossas previsões.

概要

这项研究调查当本土公司有外国首席执行官(CEO)时, 公司的企业社会绩效 (CSP) 是否有所不同。基于社会身份的视角, 我们认为, 由于外国CEO被本土公司的利益相关者视为群外 (或非典型) 领导者, 因此拥有外国CEO的本土公司需要达到比有本土CEO的本土公司更高的CSP水平, 以提高它们的合法性和可信赖性。此外, 我们提出, 外国和本土CEO领导的公司在CSP方面的预期差异在下属情况将更大 (a) 对真实而增进信任的企业社会责任(CSR)活动, 以及 (b) 在那些CEO的外国程度显著, 因此与当地人建立信任的需求更加明显的社会经济环境中。在18个发达国家的1,001家本土公司2003至2015年间的样本中, 我们的实证结果支持我们大多数的预期。

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Abrams, D., & Hogg, M. A. 1990. An introduction to the social identity approach. In D. Abrams & M. A. Hogg (Eds), Social identity theory: Constructive and critical advances: 1–9. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aguilera, R. V., & Grøgaard, B. 2019. The dubious role of institutions in international business: A road forward. Journal of International Business Studies, 50, 20–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. 2012. What we know and don’t know about corporate social responsibility: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 38(4): 932–968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahlstrom, D., Arregle, J.-L., Hitt, M. A., Qian, G., Ma, X., & Faems, D. 2020. Managing technological, sociopolitical, and institutional change in the new normal. Journal of Management Studies, 57(3): 411–437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alabastro, A., Rast, D. E., Lac, A., Hogg, M. A., & Crano, W. D. 2013. Intergroup bias and perceived similarity: Effects of successes and failures on support for in- and outgroup political leaders. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 16(1): 58–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnett, J. J. 2002. The psychology of globalization. American Psychologist, 57(10): 774–783.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arp, F., Hutchings, K., & Smith, W. A. 2013. Foreign executives in local organisations: An exploration of differences to other types of expatriates. Journal of Global Mobility, 1(3): 312–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. 1989. Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14(1): 20–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldini, M., Dal Maso, L., Liberatore, G., Mazzi, F., & Terzani, S. 2018. Role of country-and firm-level determinants in environmental, social, and governance disclosure. Journal of Business Ethics, 150(1): 79–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balliet, D., Wu, J., & De Dreu, C. K. W. 2014. Ingroup favoritism in cooperation: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 140(6): 1556–1581.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bapuji, H., Husted, B. W., Lu, J., & Mir, R. 2018. Value creation, appropriation, and distribution: How firms contribute to societal economic inequality. Business and Society, 57(6): 983–1009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, M. L. 2019. The business case for corporate social responsibility: A critique and an indirect path forward. Business and Society, 58, 167–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barreto, N. B., & Hogg, M. A. 2017. Evaluation of and support for group prototypical leaders: A meta-analysis of twenty years of empirical research. Social Influence, 12(1): 41–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharya, C. B., Korschun, D., & Sen, S. 2009. Strengthening stakeholder-company relationships through mutually beneficial corporate social responsibility initiatives. Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 257–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bitektine, A. 2011. Toward a theory of social judgments of organizations: The case of legitimacy, reputation, and status. Academy of Management Review, 36(1): 151–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bosch, M., Carnero, M. A., & Farre, L. 2010. Information and discrimination in the rental housing market: Evidence from a field experiment. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 40(1): 11–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brambilla, M., Hewstone, M., & Colucci, F. P. 2013. Enhancing moral virtues: Increased perceived outgroup morality as a mediator of intergroup contact effects. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 16(5): 648–657.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brambilla, M., Rusconi, P., Sacchi, S., & Cherubini, P. 2011. Looking for honesty: The primary role of morality (vs. sociability and competence) in information gathering. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 135–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, M. B. 1999. The psychology of prejudice: Ingroup love and outgroup hate? Journal of Social Issues, 55(3): 429–444.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, M. B. 2010. Intergroup relations. In R. F. Baumeister & E. J. Finkel (Eds), Advanced social psychology: The state of the science: 535–571. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J., Eden, L., & Miller, S. R. 2012. Multinationals and corporate social responsibility in host countries: Does distance matter? Journal of International Business Studies, 43(1): 84–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, K., Kim, I., & Li, Y. 2014. The heterogeneous impact of corporate social responsibility activities that target different stakeholders. Journal of Business Ethics, 125, 211–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, S., & Bouvain, P. 2009. Is corporate responsibility converging? A comparison of corporate responsibility reporting in the USA, UK, Australia, and Germany. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(1): 299–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, G., Crossland, C., & Huang, S. 2016. Female board representation and corporate acquisition intensity. Strategic Management Journal, 37(2): 303–313.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chernev, A., & Blair, S. 2015. Doing well by doing good: The benevolent halo of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(6): 1412–1425.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, T. S., & Linzer, D. A. 2015. Should I use fixed or random effects? Political Science Research and Methods, 3(2): 399–408.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crossland, C., & Hambrick, D. C. 2007. How national systems differ in their constraints on corporate executives: A study of CEO effects in three countries. Strategic Management Journal, 28(8): 767–789.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuypers, I. R. P., Koh, P.-S., & Wang, H. 2016. Sincerity in corporate philanthropy, stakeholder perceptions and firm. Organization Science, 27(1): 173–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dietz, J., Joshi, C., Esses, V. M., Hamilton, L. K., & Gabarrot, F. 2015. The skill paradox: Explaining and reducing employment discrimination against skilled immigrants. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 26(10): 1318–1334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., & Kawakami, K. 2003. Intergroup contact: The past, present, and the future. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 6(1): 5–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dreher, A. 2006. Does globalization affect growth? Evidence from a new index of globalization. Applied Economics, 38(10): 1091–1110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Du, S., Swaen, V., Lindgreen, A., & Sen, S. 2013. The roles of leadership styles in corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 114(1): 155–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eikon. 2018. Thomson Reuters ESG Scores. Thomson Reuters, May.

  • Eller, A., & Abrams, D. 2004. Come together: Longitudinal comparisons of Pettigrew’s reformulated intergroup contact model and the Common Ingroup Identity Model in Anglo-French and Mexican-American contexts. European Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 229–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, P. D. 2010. Effect sizes and the interpretation of research results in international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 41, 1581–1588.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fang, T., Samnani, A.-K., Novicevic, M. M., & Bing, M. N. 2013. Liability-of-foreignness effects on job success of immigrant job seekers. Journal of World Business, 48(1): 98–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrell, A., Liang, H., & Renneboog, L. 2016. Socially responsible firms. Journal of Financial Economics, 122(3): 585–606.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flammer, C. 2018. Competing for government procurement contracts: The role of corporate social responsibility. Strategic Management Journal, 39, 1299–1324.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun, C. J. 1996. Reputation. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Francis, B., Harper, P., & Kumar, S. 2018. The effects of institutional corporate social responsibility on bank loans. Business and Society, 57(7): 1407–1439.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. 2000. Reducing intergroup bias: The common ingroup identity model. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardberg, N. A., & Fombrun, C. H. 2006. Corporate citizenship: Creating intangible assets across institutional environments. Academy of Management Review, 31(2): 329–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey, P. C. 2005. The relationship between corporate philanthropy and shareholder wealth: A risk management perspective. Academy of Management Review, 30(4): 777–798.

    Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey, P. C., Merrill, C. B., & Hansen, J. M. 2009. The relationship between corporate social responsibility and shareholder value: An empirical test of the risk management hypothesis. Strategic Management Journal, 30(4): 425–445.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E. 1997) (First published in 1959. Self-presentation. In C. Lemert & A. Branaman (Eds), The Goffman reader: 21–26. Oxford: Blackwell.

  • Goodwin, G. P., Piazza, J., & Rozin, P. 2014. Moral character predominates in person perception and evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106(1): 148–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimalda, G., Buchan, N., & Brewer, M. 2018. Social identity mediates the positive effect of globalization on individual cooperation: Results from international experiments. PLoS ONE, 13(12): e0206819.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gygli, S., Haelg, F., Potrafke, N., & Sturm, J.-E. 2019. The KOF Globalisation Index—revisited. The Review of International Organizations, 14(3): 543–574.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haffar, M., & Searcy, C. 2017. Classification of trade-offs encountered in the practice of corporate sustainability. Journal of Business Ethics, 140, 495–522.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hainmueller, J., & Hopkins, D. J. 2014. Public attitudes toward immigration. Annual Review of Political Science, 17, 225–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, P.A., & Gingerich D.W. 2004. Varieties of capitalism and institutional complementarities in the macroeconomy. MPIfG discussion paper from Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies No 04/5.

  • Hall, P. A., & Soskice, D. 2001. An introduction to varieties of capitalism. In P. A. Hall & D. Soskice (Eds), Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage: 1–68. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. 1984. Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9(2): 193–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannah, S. T., Sayari, N., Harris, F., & Cain, C. L. 2020. The direct and moderating effects of endogenous corporate social responsibility on firm valuation: Theoretical and empirical evidence from the global financial crisis. Journal of Management Studies. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12586.

  • Harjoto, M., Laksmana, I., & Lee, R. 2015. Board diversity and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 132(4): 641–660.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewstone, M., Rubin, M., & Willis, H. 2002. Intergroup bias. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1): 575–604.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoetker, G., & Agarwal, R. 2007. Death hurts, but it isn’t fatal: The postexit diffusion of knowledge created by innovative companies. Academy of Management Journal, 50(2): 446–467.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogg, M. A. 2001. A social identity theory of leadership. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(3): 184–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogg, M. A. 2016. Social identity theory. In S. McKeown, R. Haji, & N. Ferguson (Eds), Peace psychology book series. Understanding peace and conflict through social identity theory: Contemporary global perspectives: 3–17. Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogg, M. A., & Terry, D. I. 2000. Social identity and self-categorization processes in organizational contexts. Academy of Management Review, 25(1): 121–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogg, M. A., Van Knippenberg, D., & Rast, D. E. 2012. Intergroup leadership in organizations: Leading across group and organizational boundaries. Academy of Management Review, 37(2): 232–255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husted, B. W., Montiel, I., & Christmann, P. 2016. Effects of local legitimacy on certification decisions to global and national CSR standards by multinational subsidiaries and domestic firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 47, 382–397.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hymer, S. H. 1960. The international operations of national firms: A study of direct foreign investment. MIT Ph.D. thesis.

  • Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. 2012. What drives corporate social performance? The role of nation-level institutions. Journal of International Business Studies, 43(9): 834–864.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, G., & Apostolakou, A. 2010. Corporate social responsibility in Western Europe: An institutional mirror or substitute? Journal of Business Ethics, 94, 371–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, G., Kotabe, M., Hamilton, R. D., & Smith, S. W. 2016. Early internationalization and the role of immigration in new venture survival. International Business Review, 25(6): 1285–1296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, M. A., Stevenson, R. M., & Letwin, C. R. 2018. A woman’s place is in the… startup! Crowdfunder judgments, implicit bias, and the stereotype content model. Journal of Business Venturing, 33(6): 813–831.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kane, A. A., Argote, L., & Levine, J. M. 2005. Knowledge transfer between groups via personnel rotation: Effects of social identity and knowledge quality. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 96(1): 56–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, H. H. 1973. The processes of causal attribution. American Psychologist, 28(2): 107–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keohane, D. 2018. Air France-KLM’s new chief warns on state’s support. The Financial Times, September 27.

  • Kessler, T., & Mummendey, A. 2001. Is there any scapegoat around? Determinants of intergroup conflicts at different categorization levels. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(6): 1090–1102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolk, A. 2016. The social responsibility of international business: From ethics and the environment to CSR and sustainable development. Journal of World Business, 51(1): 23–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kroker, M. 2013. Ich bin ein tausendprozentiger SAPler! WirtschaftsWoche.

  • Lamin, A., & Livanis, G. 2013. Agglomeration, catch-up and the liability of foreignness in emerging economies. Journal of International Business Studies, 44(6): 579–606.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lange, D., Boivie, S., & Westphal, J. D. 2015. Predicting organizational identification at the CEO level. Strategic Management Journal, 36(8): 1224–1244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazonick, W., & O’Sullivan, M. 2000. Maximizing shareholder value: A new ideology for corporate governance. Economy and Society, 29(1): 13–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Legrand, C., Ariss, A. A., & Bozionelos, N. 2019. Migrant CEOs: Barriers and strategies on the way to the top. European Management Review, 16, 597–615.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mäkelä, K., Andersson, U., & Seppälä, T. 2012. Interpersonal similarity and knowledge sharing within multinational organizations. International Business Review, 21(3): 439–451.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maniora, J. 2017. Is integrated reporting really the superior mechanism for the integration of ethics into the core business model? An empirical analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 140(4): 755–786.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manner, M. H. 2010. The impact of CEO characteristics on corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 93(1): 53–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mata, J., & Alves, C. 2018. The survival of firms founded by immigrants: Institutional distance between home and host country, and experience in the host country. Strategic Management Journal, 39(11): 2965–2991.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mau, S., Mewes, J., & Zimmermann, A. 2008. Cosmopolitan attitudes through transnational social practices? Global Networks, 8(1): 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. 1995. An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3): 709–734.

    Google Scholar 

  • McAllister, D. J. 1995. Affect-and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 38(1): 24–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muethel, M., & Bond, M. H. 2013. National context and individual employees’ trust of the out-group: The role of societal trust. Journal of International Business Studies, 44(4): 312–333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nachum, L. 2010. When is foreignness an asset or a liability? Explaining the performance differential between foreign and local firms. Journal of Management, 36(3): 714–739.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nardinelli, C., & Simon, C. 1990. Customer racial discrimination in the market for memorabilia: The case of baseball. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 105(3): 575–595.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, B. B., & Nielsen, S. 2013. Top management team nationality diversity and firm performance: A multilevel study. Strategic Management Journal, 34(3): 373–382.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papke, L. E., & Wooldridge, J. M. 2008. Panel data methods for fractional response variables with an application to test pass rates. Journal of Econometrics, 145(1–2): 121–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, S. H., & Westphal, J. D. 2013. Social discrimination in the corporate elite: How status affects the propensity for minority CEOs to receive blame for low firm performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58(4): 542–586.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng, M. W., Wang, D. Y. L., & Jiang, Y. 2008. An institution-based view of international business strategy: A focus on emerging economies. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(5): 920–936.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. 2006. A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5): 751–783.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pisani, N., Kourula, A., Kolk, A., & Meijer, R. 2017. How global is international CSR research? Insights and recommendations from a systematic review. Journal of World Business, 52(5): 591–614.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quigley, T. J., & Hambrick, D. C. 2015. Has the “CEO effect” increased in recent decades? A new explanation for the great rise in America’s attention to corporate leaders. Strategic Management Journal, 36(6): 821–830.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rathert, N. 2016. Strategies of legitimation: MNEs and the adoption of CSR in response to host-country institutions. Journal of International Business Studies, 47(7): 858–879.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redding, G. 2005. The thick description and comparison of societal systems of capitalism. Journal of International Business Studies, 36(2): 123–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodrik, D. 2018. Populism and the economics of globalization. Journal of International Business Policy, 1, 12–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saito, H. 2011. An actor-network theory of cosmopolitanism. Sociological Theory, 29(2): 124–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, A., & 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, 48(4): 899–931.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharfman, M. P., Wolf, G., Chase, R. B., & Tansik, D. A. 1988. Antecedents of organizational slack. Academy of Management Review, 13(4): 601–614.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaukat, A., Qiu, Y., & Trojanowski, G. 2016. Board attributes, corporate social responsibility strategy, and corporate environmental and social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(3): 569–585.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shields, J., & Harvey, A. 2010. Succumbing to the burden of foreignness: A social constructionist analysis of Australian print media representations of Telstra CEO Sol Trujillo. Management Communication Quarterly, 24(2): 288–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slater, D. J., & Dixon-Fowler, H. R. 2009. CEO international assignment experience and corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 89(3): 473–489.

    Google Scholar 

  • Springkle, G., & Maines, L. 2010. The benefits and costs of corporate social responsibility. Business Horizon, 53, 445–453.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. K., Tung, R. L., Kostova, T., & Zellmer-Bruhn, M. 2016. Widening the lens: Rethinking distance, diversity, and foreignness in international business research through positive organizational scholarship. Journal of International Business Studies, 47(6): 621–630.

    Google Scholar 

  • Staw, B. M., & Epstein, L. D. 2000. What bandwagons bring: Effects of popular management techniques on corporate performance, reputation, and CEO pay. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(3): 523–556.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoddard, O., & Leibbrandt, A. 2014. An experimental study on the relevance and scope of nationality as a coordination device. Economic Inquiry, 52, 1392–1407.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, M. C. 1995. Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3): 571–610.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. 1986. The social identity theory of intergroup behaviour. Chicago.

  • Tarabashkina, L., Quester, P. G., & Tarabashkina, O. 2020. How much firms “give” to CSR vs how much they “gain” from it: Inequity perceptions and their implications for CSR authenticity. European Journal of Marketing, 54(8): 1987–2012.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thérin, F. 2011. Super Français pour hypers allemands. Enjeux - Les Echos 276. 1st February.

  • Van Beurden, P., & Goessling, T. 2008. The worth of values—a literature review on the relation between corporate social and financial performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 82, 407–424.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Knippenberg, D. 2011. Embodying who we are: Leader group prototypicality and leadership effectiveness. Leadership Quarterly, 22, 1078–1091.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldman, D. A., Siegel, D. S., & Javidan, M. 2006. Components of CEO transformational leadership and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Management Studies, 43(8): 1703–1725.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, J., Gibson, C., & Zander, U. 2020. Editors’ comments: Is research on corporate social responsibility undertheorized? Academy of Management Review, 45(1): 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Witt, M. A., & Jackson, G. 2016. Varieties of capitalism and institutional comparative advantage: A test and reinterpretation. Journal of International Business Studies, 47, 778–806.

    Google Scholar 

  • Witt, M. A., & Lewin, A. Y. 2007. Outward foreign direct investment as escape response to home country institutional constraints. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(4): 579–594.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wojciszke, B., Bazinska, R., & Jaworski, M. 1998. On the dominance of moral categories in impression formation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4(12): 1251–1263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamak, S., Nielsen, S., & Escribá-Esteve, A. 2013. The role of external environment in upper echelons theory: A review of existing literature and future research directions. Group and Organization Management, 39(1): 69–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, S. L., & Makhija, M. V. 2014. Firms’ corporate social responsibility behavior: An integration of institutional and profit maximization approaches. Journal of International Business Studies, 45(6): 670–698.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaheer, S. 1995. Overcoming the liability of foreignness. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2): 341–363.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was funded by the Insight Development Grant of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (430-2018-01123) and the Fundacion Ramon Areces (CISP15A3194).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Fundação Getúlio Vargas – FGV/EBAPE, Rua Jornalista Orlando Dantas 30 - Botafogo, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, 22231-010, Brazil

    Olivier Bertrand

  2. HEC Montréal, 3000, chemin de la Côte-Sainte-Catherine, Montréal, H3T 2A7, Canada

    Marie-Ann Betschinger

  3. IE Business School, Calle Maria de Molina 11, 28006, Madrid, Spain

    Caterina Moschieri

Authors
  1. Olivier Bertrand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marie-Ann Betschinger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Caterina Moschieri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marie-Ann Betschinger.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Accepted by Jiatao Li, Area Editor, 6 October 2020. This article has been with the authors for three revisions.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bertrand, O., Betschinger, MA. & Moschieri, C. Are firms with foreign CEOs better citizens? A study of the impact of CEO foreignness on corporate social performance. J Int Bus Stud 52, 525–543 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-020-00381-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-020-00381-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation