From <i>Doing Good</i> to <i>Looking Even Better</i> : The Dynamics of CSR and Reputation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Grounded in stakeholder theory and a resource-based view of the firm, this longitudinal research demonstrates the evolution of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and firm reputation over time. Drawing on a 5-year sample of 285 major U.S. firms obtained from the KLD database and Fortune’s Most Admired Companies, we find that the proposed dynamic relationship predicts evolving stakeholder expectations to incite organizations to improve their social performance to earn reputational benefits. Contrary to the often labeled stickiness of reputation, we find a “Red Queen” effect that supports reputation as a dynamic construct where the change in CSR does predict a change in corporate reputation. Similarly, we find that the change in reputation over time varies by industry, being most pronounced for manufacturing. From a practical perspective, this relationship across time may incite managers to create sustainable competitive advantage by continuously investing in doing good to reap the benefits of looking good and looking even better with time.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it