CSR as a Driver of Corporate Reputation: Family Firms in the Italian Luxury Industry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the paper is to analyse the relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and brand reputation in the luxury sector. In particular, the paper from one hand analyzes the drivers that lead to a growing integration of social responsibility in the competitive strategies of luxury firms and, on the other hand focuses on the role of CSR as a driver of brand reputation. Starting from review of the literature, the factors that influence the reputation in the brand-based global luxury industry are discussed, highlighting a gradual shift from reputation based on product quality to one focused on firm’s sustainability. The methodology also includes three case studies of Italian family firms representing best practices in CRS reputation according to 2015 version of Standard Ethics Italian Index: Brunello Cucinelli, Damiani and Luxottica. The study highlights the increasing role CSR practices are assuming in the luxury industry along with the needs for luxury firms to adopt strategic innovations and innovative business models coherent with the principles of sustainability. Furthermore, the analysis illustrates how different socially responsible behaviors have influenced the economic results of the three companies analyzed. The empirical evidences contribute to the CSR and reputation literature by focusing on Italian family firms operating in the luxury sector.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".