Corporate Governance and Corporate Social Responsibility Synergies: A Systemic Approach

Open access


Respecting the importance of corporate governance (CG), particularly various corporate governance mechanisms for improving corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities, the paper highlights relevant CG–CSR synergies from the perspective of systems thinking. The paper further aims to demonstrate the ways in which selected systems methodologies can support CG–CSR synergies. Accordingly, we selected appropriate systems methodologies, such as dialectical systems theory, soft systems methodology, and system dynamics. We defined the dialectical system, consisting of essential corporate governance mechanisms, which contribute to CSR; we also identified the key stakeholders and their perceptions of CG–CSR relations through CATWOE analysis; thus, the appropriate root definition and conceptual model, including the activities that are relevant for CG–CSR relations, were developed. Developed systemic framework provided a relevant methodological support to highlight the various issues of corporate governance, such as institutional framework, market for corporate control, ownership structure, board structure, and their contribution to CSR.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Aguilera R. V. Filatotchev I. Gospel H. & Jackson G. (2008). An organizational approach to comparative corporate governance: Costs contingencies and complementarities. Organization Science 19(3) 475–492.

  • Aguilera R. V. Williams C. A. Conley J. M. & Rupp D. E. (2006). Corporate governance and social responsibility: A comparative analysis of the UK and the US. Corporate Governance: An International Review 14(3) 147–158.

  • Aguilera R.V. Desender K. Bednar M. K. & Lee J. H. (2015). Connecting the dots: Bringing external corporate governance into the corporate governance puzzle. The Academy of Management Annals 9(1) 483–573.

  • Aguinis H. & Glavas A. (2012). What we know and don’t know about corporate social responsibility: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management 38(4) 932–968.

  • Arora P. & Dharwadkar R. (2011). Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility (CSR): The moderating roles of attainment discrepancy and organization slack. Corporate Governance: An International Review 19(2) 136–152.

  • Babić V. & Nikolić J. (2016). Key factors of corporate governance model development in transition economies. Theme XL(2) 747-761.

  • Babić V. (2010). Corporate governance in transition economies. Theme 34(2) 555-568.

  • Babić V. Nikolić J. & Erić J. (2011). Rethinking the performance of board roles: Toward an integrative model. Economic Annals LVI(190) 140-162.

  • Babić V. Nikolić J. & Erić J. (2013). Board Structure and Corporate Performance: Traditional vs. Contemporary Approach. In V. Babić (Ed.) Contemporary Issues in Economics Business and Management (pp. 49-61). Kragujevac: Ekonomski fakultet Univerziteta u Kragujevcu

  • Bichta C. (2016). Corporate social responsibility a role in government policy and regulation? Retrieved from

  • Block D. & Gerstner A. M. (2016). One-tier vs. two-tier board structure: A comparison between United States and Germany. Retrieved from

  • Checkland P. (1981). Systems Thinking Systems Practice. Chichester: J. Wiley

  • Crecpi R. & Renneboog L. (2010). (Institutional) shareholder activism new? Evidence from UK shareholder coalitions in the pre-Cadbury era. Corporate Governance: An International Review 18(4) 274-295.

  • Daily C. M. Dalton D. R. & Cannella A. A. (2003). Corporate governance: Decades of dialogue and data. Academy of Management Review 28(3) 371–382.

  • Dam L. & Scholtens B. (2012). Does ownership type matter for corporate social responsibility? Corporate Governance: An International Review 20(3) 233–252.

  • Dam L. & Scholtens B. (2013). Ownership concentration and CSR policy of European multinational enterprises. Journal of Business Ethics 118(1) 117–126.

  • Denis D. & McConnell J. (2003). International corporate governance. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 38(1) 1–36.

  • Devinney T. M. (2009). Is the socially responsible corporation a myth? The good the bad and the ugly of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Perspectives 23 44–56.

  • Devinney T. Schwalbach J. & Williams C. (2013). Corporate social responsibility and corporate governance: Comparative perspectives. Corporate Governance: An International Review 21(5) 413–419.

  • Fama E. F. & Jensen M. C. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics 26(2) 301-326.

  • Fernandez-Feijoo B. Romero S. & Ruiz-Blanco S. (2014). Women on boards: Do they affect sustainability reporting? Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 21(6) 351–364.

  • Freeman R. E. (1999). Divergent stakeholder theory. Academy of Management Review24(2) 233-236.

  • Harjoto M. A. & Jo H. (2011). Corporate governance and CSR nexus. Journal of Business Ethics 100(1) 45–67.

  • Huang C. J. (2010). Corporate governance corporate social responsibility and corporate performance. Journal of Management & Organization 16(5) 641–655.

  • Huse M. (2007). Boards Governance and Value Creation: The Human side of corporate governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

  • Ioannou I. & Serafeim G. (2012). What drives corporate social performance? The role of nation-level institutions. Journal of International Business Studies 43(9) 834-864.

  • ISO (2010). ISO 26000:2010 ISO. International Organization for Standardization Retrieved from

  • Jain T. & Jamali D. (2016). Looking inside the black box: The effect of corporate governance on corporate social responsibility. Corporate Governance: An International Review 24(3) 253–273.

  • Jamali D. Hallal M. & Abdallah H. (2010). Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility: evidence from the healthcare sector. Corporate Governance 10(5) 590-602.

  • Jamali D. Safieddine A. & Rabbath M. (2008). Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility: Synergies and interrelationships. Corporate Governance: An International Review 16(5) 443–459.

  • Jensen M. C. & Meckling W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economic 3(4) 305-360.

  • La Porta R. López de Silanes F. & Shleifer A. (1999). Corporate ownership around the world. Journal of Finance 54(2) 471–517.

  • Lane D. (2008). The emergence and use of diagramming in system dynamics: A critical account. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 25(1) 3-23.

  • Larcker D. & Tayan B. (2011). Corporate governance matters: A closer look at organizational choices and their consequences. New Yersey: Pearson Education Inc.

  • Lebe S. S. & Mulej M. guest-editors and authors with coauthors (2014). Social responsibility and holism in tourism. Kybernetes 43(3-4) 346-666.

  • Mallin C. A. Michelon G. & Raggi D. (2013). Monitoring intensity and stakeholders’ orientation: How does governance affect social and environmental disclosure? Journal of Business Ethics 114(1) 29–43.

  • Maon F. Lindgreen A. & Swaen V. (2008). Thinking of the organization as a system: The role of managerial perceptions in developing a corporate social responsibility strategic agenda. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 25 413-426.

  • Monks R. & Minow N. (2002). Corporate Governance. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing

  • Morgan S. (2009). The impact of corporate social responsibility on mergers and acquisition. Oregon: Oregon State University - University Honors College Corvallis

  • Mulej M. (1974). Dialektična teorija sistemov in ljudski reki (in Slovene: The Dialectical Systems Theory and Proverbs). Naše gospodarstvo 21(3-4) 207-212.

  • Mulej M. (2000). Dialektična in druge mehkosistemske teorije (In Slovene: The Dialectical and Other Soft-Systems Theories). Maribor: University of Maribor Faculty of Economics and Business

  • Mulej M. & (by ABC order): S. Božičnik V. Čančer A. Hrast T. Jere Lazanski K. Jurše Š. Kajzer J. Knez-Riedl T. Mlakar N. Mulej V. Potočan F. Risopoulos B. Rosi G. Steiner T. Štrukelj D. Uršič Z. Ženko (2013a). Dialectical Systems Thinking and the Law of Requisite Holism Concerning Innovation. Litchfield Park AZ: Emergent Publication

  • Mulej M. Hrast A. & Ženko Z. guest-editors and authors with coauthors (2013b). Social responsibility – measures and measurement. Systems Practice and Action Research 26(6) 471-588.

  • Mulej M. Hrast A. & Dyck R. guest-editors and authors with coauthors (2015). Social responsibility – a new socio-economic order. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 32(2)147-264

  • Neubaum D. O. & Zahra S. A. (2006). Institutional ownership and corporate social performance: The moderating effects of investment horizon activism and coordination. Journal of Management 32(1) 108–131.

  • Nikolić J. & Babić V. (2016). The implications of ownership concentration for shareholder protection and strategic decision-making. Economic Annals LXI(211) 47-76.

  • Rees W. & Rodionova T. (2015). The influence of family ownership on corporate social responsibility: An international analysis of publicly listed companies. Corporate Governance: an International Review 23(3) 184-202.

  • Sánchez J. L. F. Sotorrío L. L. & Díez E. B. (2011). The relationship between corporate governance and corporate social behavior: a structural equation model analysis. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 18(2) 91-101.

  • Savović S. (2012). The importance of post-acquisition integration for value creation and success of mergers and acquisitions. Economic Horizons 14(3) 193-205.

  • Shleifer A. & Vishny R. (1997). A survey of corporate governance. Journal of Finance 52(2) 737–783.

  • Sjöström E. (2008). Shareholder activism for corporate social responsibility: What do we know? Sustainable Development 16(3) 141–154.

  • Stojanović-Aleksić V. Erić-Nilesen J. & Bošković A. (2016). Social responsibility in the banking sector: Experience from Serbia. Bankarstvo 45(2) 35-55.

  • Tricker B. (2009). Corporate Governance: Principles Policies and Practices. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.

  • Windsor D. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: Three key approaches. Journal of Management Studies 43(1) 93–114.

  • Yoshikawa T. & Rasheed A. (2009). Convergence of corporate governance: Critical review and future directions. Corporate Governance: An International Review17(3) 388–404.

  • Ženko Z. & Mulej M. (2011). Diffusion of innovative behaviour with social responsibility. Kybernetes 40(9/10) 1258-1272. https://doiorg/10.1108/03684921111169378

  • Ženko Z. Hrast A. & Mulej M. (2013). Social responsibility: Measures and measurement as a basis for organizational systemic action. Systemic Practice and Action Research 26 475-484.

  • Zhang J. Q. Zhu H. & Ding H. (2013). Board composition and corporate social responsibility: An empirical investigation in the post Sarbanes-Oxley era. Journal of Business Ethics 114(3) 381–392.

  • Zhang R. Rezaee Z. & Zhu J. (2010). Corporate philanthropic disaster response and ownership type: Evidence from Chinese firms’ response to the Sichuan earthquake. Journal of Business Ethics 91 51–63.

  • Zlatanović D. (2012). System dynamics models in management problems solving. Economic Horizons 14(1) 25-38.

  • Zlatanović D. (2015). A holistic approach to corporate social responsibility as a prerequisite for sustainable development: empirical evidence. Economic AnnalsLX(207) 69-94.

  • Zlatanović D. & Mulej M. (2015). Soft-systems approaches to knowledge-cum-values management as innovation drivers. Baltic Journal of Management 10(4) 497-518.

Journal information
Cited By
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 619 432 239
PDF Downloads 574 408 240