The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility as a Marketing Investment on Firms’ Performance: A Risk-Oriented Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In light of the growing interest in corporate social responsibility (CSR), there is still controversy regarding its impact on firms’ performance. In this paper, we examine the impact of CSR initiatives, as a marketing investment, on firms’ performance. We treat CSR initiatives as investment and, consequently, the returns appear over the long term. We use the stochastic frontier analysis (SFA) approach which is a forward-looking financial market-based metric that captures the firm’s long-term performance. We focus on the banking industry as it confronts a variety compound of risk. We find that CSR implementation is positively reflected in profit efficiency, regardless of the strategic commitment to implementing CSR and bank size, as these variables do not influence the CSR–performance relationship. However, we find that bank age and competitive positioning have a significant impact on the CSR–performance relationship. Our study provides valuable insights to CSR practitioners and researchers, especially in the banking sector. We provide empirical evidence on the importance of CSR and its positive impact on bank performance in Egypt as one of the emerging markets.
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 | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".