THE TRADE-OFF BETWEEN CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AND COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE: A BIFORM GAME MODEL
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
This paper uses a biform game model to study firms’ trade-offs between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and competitive advantage. We focus on the context in which a competitive advantage may lead to a non-profitable scenario. It is possible that the first mover’s investment in competitive strength may deter itself from the market, which encourages firms’ investment in CSR over competitive strength. As a result, in some circumstances, firms may actively choose a CSR strategy over a competitive strategy. Our results show that (1) technological characteristics, (2) industrial structure, and (3) institutional environments are factors that influence the rational equilibrium of our model and the balance between competitive advantage and CSR. The mechanism and boundary on how firms make trade-offs between CSR activities and competitive strength are exhibited by our model, which provides a framework for decision-making and adds new insights into the strategic balance between market and non-market strategies.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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