The Common Good Balance Sheet, an Adequate Tool to Capture Non-Financials?

Sustainability Sustainability 2071-1050 SUSTDE 7 2019 11 14 The Common Good Balance Sheet, an Adequate Tool to Capture Non-Financials? Christian Felber IASS Berlin-Potsdam, Berliner Straβe 30, DE 14467 Potsdam, Germany Vanessa Campos Business Administration Department, Faculty of Economics, University of València, Tarongers Av., 46022 València, Spain Joan R. Sanchis Business Administration Department, Faculty of Economics, University of València, Tarongers Av., 46022 València, Spain http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2475-3299

In relation to organizational performance measurement, there is a growing concern about the creation of value for people, society and the environment. The traditional corporate reporting does not adequately satisfy the information needs of stakeholders for assessing an organization’s past and future potential performance. Practitioners and scholars have developed new non-financial reporting frameworks from a social and environmental perspective, giving birth to the field of Integrated Reporting (IR). The Economy for the Common Good (ECG) model and its tools to facilitate sustainability management and reporting can provide a framework to do it. The present study depicts the theoretical foundations from the business administration field research on which the ECG model relies. Moreover, this paper is the first one that empirically validates such measurement scales by applying of Exploratory Factor Analysis on a sample of 206 European firms. Results show that two out of five dimensions are appropriately defined, along with some guidelines to refine the model. Consequently, it allows knowledge to advance as it assesses the measurement scales’ statistical validity and reliability. However, as this is the first quantitative-driven research on the ECG model, the authors’ future research will confirm the present results by means of Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA).

07 11 2019 3791 su11143791 10.3390/mdpi_crossmark_policy Humanistic Management Practices gGmbH HMP https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 10.3390/su11143791 https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/14/3791 https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/14/3791/pdf Brundtland, G., Khalid, M., Agnelli, S., Al-Athel, S., Chidzero, B., Fadika, L., and Singh, M. (1987). Our Common Future, United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development. Brundtland report. Dyllick Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability Bus. Strateg. Environ. 2002 10.1002/bse.323 11 130 Schaltegger Corporate sustainability accounting: A nightmare or a dream coming true? Bus. Strateg. Environ. 2006 10.1002/bse.537 15 293 Johnson Two decades of sustainability & management tools for SMEs: How far have we come? J. Small Bus. Manag. 2016 10.1111/jsbm.12154 54 481 10.3390/su11071887 La Torre, M., Trotta, A., Chiappini, H., and Rizzello, A. (2019). Business models for sustainable finance: The case study of social impact bonds. Sustainability, 11. Flower The international integrated reporting council: A story of failure Crit. Perspec. Acc. 2015 10.1016/j.cpa.2014.07.002 27 1 Dumay Integrated reporting: A structured literature review Acc. Forum 2016 10.1016/j.accfor.2016.06.001 40 166 Klaus, F., Kroczak, A., Facchinetti, G., and Egloff, S. (2013). Economy for the Common Good. DAS in Sustainable Business, Business School Lausanne. Available online: https://balance.ecogood.org/ecg-reports/bsl-economy-of-the-common-good.pdf. Michelson The common good of the firm and humanistic management: Conscious capitalism and economy of communion J. Bus. Ethics 2017 10.1007/s10551-016-3118-6 145 701 10.1002/tqem.3310080106 Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of the 21st-Century Business, Capstone Publishing. Felber, C. (2008). Neue Werte für die Wirtschaft—eine Alternative zu Kapitalismus und Kommunismus, Deuticke. Felber, C. (2018). Gemeinwohl-Ökonomie, Piper. Felber, C. (2015). Change Everything: Creating an Economy for the Common Good, Zed Books. Freeman, R.E. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach, Pitman Publishing. European Economic and Social Committee (2019, April 15). The Economy for the Common Good: A Sustainable Economic Model Geared Towards Social Cohesion, EUR-Lex. Available online: lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/. Foti The economy of the common good: The expression of a new sustainable economic model Qual. Acc. Suc. 2017 18 16 The economy for the common good and the social and solidarity economies, are they complementary? CIRIEC J. Pub. Soc. Coop. Econ. 2017 87 257 Dierksmeier Oikonomia versus chrematistiké, learning from aristotle about the future orientation of business management J. Bus. Ethics 2009 10.1007/s10551-009-0128-7 88 417 Freeman Stockholders and stakeholders: A new perspective on corporate governance Calif. Manag. Rev. 1983 10.2307/41165018 25 88 Donaldson The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications Acad. Manag. Rev. 1995 10.2307/258887 20 65 Mitchell Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts Acad. Manag. Rev. 1997 10.2307/259247 22 853 10.1093/oso/9780199269860.001.0001 Friedman, A.L., and Miles, S. (2006). Stakeholders: Theory and Practice, Oxford University Press. Adeneye Corporate social responsibility and company performance J. Bus. Stud. Quart. 2015 7 151 Jiang A Win-win outcome between corporate environmental performance and corporate value: From the perspective of stakeholders Sustainability 2019 10.3390/su11030921 11 921 Lux Mixing business with politics: A meta-analysis of the antecedents and outcomes of corporate political activity J. Manag. 2011 37 223 Carroll, A.B., and Buchholtz, A. (2006). Business and Society: Ethics and Stakeholder Management, Thompson Learning. [6th ed.]. Ackermann Strategic management of stakeholders: Theory and practice Long Range Plan. 2011 10.1016/j.lrp.2010.08.001 44 179 10.3390/su8040379 Bellantuono, N., Pontrandolfo, P., and Scozzi, B. (2016). Capturing the stakeholders’ view in sustainability reporting: A novel approach. Sustainability, 8. Miles Stakeholder theory classification: A theoretical and empirical evaluation of definitions J. Bus. Ethics 2017 10.1007/s10551-015-2741-y 142 437 Smith The Shareholders vs. Stakeholders debate MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 2003 44 85 The stakeholder theory and the common good J. Bus. Ethics 1998 10.1023/A:1006075517423 17 1093 Porter Creating shared value Harvard Bus. Rev. 2011 89 1 10.3390/su11113037 Barisan, L., Lucchetta, M., Bolzonella, C., and Boatto, V. (2019). How does carbon footprint create shared values in the wine industry? Empirical evidence from prosecco superiore PDO’s wine district. Sustainability, 11. Porter Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility Harvard Bus. Rev. 2006 84 1 How creating shared value differs from corporate social responsibility J. Manag. Bus. Admin. 2016 24 32 Florin Creating shared value in the hybrid venture arena: A business model innovation perspective J. Soc. Entrepren. 2011 10.1080/19420676.2011.614631 2 165 Beschorner Creating shared value: The one-trick pony approach Bus. Ethics J. Rev. 2014 1 106 Michelini New business models for creating shared value Soc. Responsib. J. 2012 10.1108/17471111211272129 8 561 Pfitzer Innovating for shared value Harvard Bus. Rev. 2013 91 100 Scholz Beyond the “Win-Win” creating shared value requires ethical frameworks Calif. Manag. Rev. 2017 10.1177/0008125617695286 59 142 Hartman Proposition: Shared value as an incomplete mental model Bus. Ethics J. Rev. 2013 10.12747/bejr2013.01.02 1 36 Crane Contesting the value of creating shared value Calif. Manag. Rev. 2014 10.1525/cmr.2014.56.2.130 56 130 Carroll A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance Acad. Manag. Rev. 1979 10.2307/257850 4 497 Carroll The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders Bus. Horizons 1991 10.1016/0007-6813(91)90005-G 34 39 Carroll Corporate social responsibility Bus. Soc. 1999 10.1177/000765039903800303 38 268 Ansaram Modelling the impact of responsibility levels on corporate financial performance: The case of top 100 firms in mauritius Bus. Econ. Res. 2018 8 118 Jose A matrix model towards CSR—Moving from one size fit approach J. Strat. Manag. 2019 10.1108/JSMA-07-2018-0071 12 243 Savitz, A. (2013). The Triple Bottom Line: How Today’s Best-Run Companies are Achieving Economic, Social and Environmental Success-And How you can too, John Wiley & Sons. Fauzi “Triple bottom line” as “Sustainable corporate performance”: A proposition for the future Sustainability 2010 10.3390/su2051345 2 1345 Gimenez Sustainable operations: Their impact on the triple bottom line Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2012 10.1016/j.ijpe.2012.01.035 140 149 Norman Getting to the bottom of the triple bottom line Bus. Ethics Quart. 2004 10.5840/beq200414211 14 243 Hristov Sustainability value creation, survival, and growth of the company: A critical perspective in the Sustainability Balanced Scorecard (SBSC) Sustainability 2019 10.3390/su11072119 11 2119 Hubbard Measuring organizational performance: Beyond the triple bottom line Bus. Strat. Environ. 2009 10.1002/bse.564 18 177 Elkington, J. (2019, April 08). The Holy Grail of Integrated Reporting. Available online: http://www.sustainability.com/blog/the-holy-grail-of-integrated-reporting. Elkington, J. (2018). 25 years ago i coined the phrase “Triple Bottom Line.” Here’s why it’s time to rethink it. Harvard Bus. Rev., Available online: https://hbr.org/2018/06/25-years-ago-i-coined-the-phrase-triple-bottom-line-heres-why-im-giving-up-on-it. Gray Sustainability reporting: Who’s kidding whom? Chart. Account. J. New Zeal. 2002 81 66 McDonough Design for the triple top line: New tools for sustainable commerce Corp. Environ. Strat. 2002 10.1016/S1066-7938(02)00069-6 9 251 Henderson Corporate social responsibility and tourism: Hotel companies in Phuket, Thailand, after the Indian Ocean tsunami Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2007 10.1016/j.ijhm.2006.02.001 26 228 Salzmann The business case for corporate sustainability: Literature review and research options Eur. Manag. J. 2005 10.1016/j.emj.2004.12.007 23 27 10.3390/su11102779 Fechete, F., and Nedelcu, A. (2019). Performance management assessment model for sustainable development. Sustainability, 11. Concepts and definitions of CSR and corporate sustainability: Between agency and communion J. Bus. Ethics 2003 10.1023/A:1023331212247 44 95 Montiel Corporate social responsibility and corporate sustainability: Separate pasts, common futures Organ. Environ. 2008 10.1177/1086026608321329 21 245 Atkinson Measuring corporate sustainability J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2000 10.1080/09640560010694 43 235 Perrini Sustainability and stakeholder management: The need for new corporate performance evaluation and reporting systems Bus. Strat. Environ. 2006 10.1002/bse.538 15 296 Schaltegger Business cases for sustainability: The role of business model innovation for corporate sustainability Int. J. Innov. Sustain. Dev. 2012 10.1504/IJISD.2012.046944 6 95 Raluca Performance evaluation of the implementation of the 2013/34/EU directive in Romania on the basis of corporate social responsibility reports Sustainability 2019 10.3390/su11092531 11 2531 Aras Corporate sustainability reporting: A study in disingenuity? J. Bus. Ethics 2009 10.1007/s10551-008-9806-0 87 279 Willis The role of the global reporting initiative’s sustainability reporting guidelines in the social screening of investments J. Bus. Ethics 2003 10.1023/A:1022958618391 43 233 10.4324/9781351278928 Visser, W., and Tolhurst, N. (2017). The World Guide to CSR: A Country-by-Country Analysis of Corporate Sustainability and Responsibility, Routledge. Levy The contested politics of corporate governance: The case of the global reporting initiative Bus. Soc. 2010 10.1177/0007650309345420 49 88 Ballou The future of corporate sustainability reporting J. Account. 2006 202 65 Milne W(h)ither ecology? The triple bottom line, the global reporting initiative, and corporate sustainability reporting J. Bus. Ethics 2013 10.1007/s10551-012-1543-8 118 13 Socially responsible investment: A view from the social rating agencies of Vigeo-Eiris and MSCI ESG Stats Financ. Mark. Valuat. 2018 4 39 Association for the promotion of the Economy for the Common Good (2019, April 08). Common Good Matrix. Available online: https://www.ecogood.org/en/common-good-balance-sheet/common-good-matrix/. Heidbrink, L., Kny, J., Köhne, R., Sommer, B., Stumpf, K., Welzer, H., and Wiefek, J. (2019, April 08). Schlussbericht für das Verbundprojekt Gemeinwohl-Ökonomie im Vergleich Unternehmerischer Nachhaltigkeitsstrategien (GIVUN). Available online: https://www.ecogood.org/media/filer_public/2a/b5/2ab5defc-c5a0-4164-9b05-6efbc3019ad4/givun-schlussbericht.pdf. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., and Anderson, R.E. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis, Pearson New International Edition. [6th ed.]. Rummel, R.J. (1970). Applied Factor Analysis, Northwestern University Press. Gorsuch, R.L. (1983). Factor Analysis, Hillsdale, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Muthen A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non-normal like variables Br. J. Math. Stat. Psychol. 1985 10.1111/j.2044-8317.1985.tb00832.x 38 171 Kaiser A second-generation little jiffi Psychometrica 1970 10.1007/BF02291817 35 401 Kaiser Little Jiffi, Mark IV Educ. Psychol. Meas. 1974 10.1177/001316447403400115 34 111 Borgatta A cautionary note on the use of principal component analysis Sociol. Meth. Res. 1986 10.1177/0049124186015001011 15 160 Snook Principal component analysis versus common factor analysis: A monte carlo study Psychol. Bull. 1989 10.1037/0033-2909.106.1.148 106 148 Gorsuch Common factor analysis versus component analysis: Some well and little-known facts Multiv. Behav. Res. 1990 10.1207/s15327906mbr2501_3 25 33 Mulaik Bluring the distinction between component analysis and common factor analysis Multiv. Behav. Res. 1990 10.1207/s15327906mbr2501_6 25 53 Velicer Component analysis versus common factor analysis: Some issues in selecting an appropriate procedure Multiv. Behav. Res. 1990 10.1207/s15327906mbr2501_1 25 1 Anderson On the assessment of unidimensional measurement: Internal and external consistency and overall consistency criteria J. Mark. Res. 1987 10.1177/002224378702400412 24 432 Hattie Methodology review: Assessing unidimensionality of test and items Appl. Psychol. Measur. 1985 10.1177/014662168500900204 9 139 McDonald The dimensionality of tests and items Br. J. Math. Soc. Psychol. 1981 10.1111/j.2044-8317.1981.tb00621.x 34 100 Nunnally, J.L. (1979). Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill. [2nd ed.].