Csr Initiative

Corporate Social ResponsibilityInitiatives: An Analysis of Voluntary

Corporate Disclosure

.**H S Sandhu* and Shveta Kapoor

The purpose of this paper is to examine the extent of involvement of companies in Corporate

Social Responsibility (CSR) initiatives in terms of high, medium and low CSR performers.

Secondary data based on a sample of 93 companies operating in India have been analyzed by

applying content analysis of annual reports and individual websites of the companies. Extent

of social involvement of the companies has been observed on the basis of their respective

social scores. The results indicate that some firms are highly involved, some are moderately

involved while others are lowly involved in CSR arena. The study further reveals that firms

are highly concerned about their shareholders followed by human resources. The firms are

found tobe highly engaged in providing retirement fund benefit plans and least percentage of

companies has been found to be engaged in providing employment to SC/ST/BC and äsabkd

persons. By applying Kmskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U-test the study reveals that

there is a significant difference between the average overall CSR scores of different categories

of CSR performers. The major limitation of the study is that CSR measurement is based on

voluntary disclosures by the companies. Better measures of CSR are, therefore, desperately

needed for future studies.

INTRODUCTION .escape irom society and society cannot

The role of business in society has exist without business (Davis andundergone several changes. Awareness of Erederick, 1985). Thus, there is a two-waythe impact of business on society and relationship between business and society,environment has grown alongwith the Gannon (1994) holds the view thatincreasing socio-regulatory pressures. It is business is expected to create wealth,no longer simple enough to employ people, supply market, generate employment,

make profits and pay taxes. Gompanies innovate and produce a sufficient surplus

are now expected to be res^ponsible, to sustain its activities and improve its

accountable and benefit the society as a competitiveness while contributing to the

whole (Brown, 2001). Business cannot maintenance of community in which it* Professor, Department of Commerce and Business Management, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar 143005,

India. E-mail: sahdhu_hs [email protected]

** Lecturer, Department of Commerce, DAV College, Amritsar. 143001, India. E-mail: shveta_2K@redifïmail.com

SOUTH ASIAN JOURNAL OF.MANAGEMENT

operates. Society is expected to providean environment in which business candevelop and prosper, allowing investorsto earn returns while ensuring thatstakeholders can enjoy the benefits oftheir involvement without any fear ofarbitrary and unjust action.Organizations are the citizens of societyand therefore, they owe certainresponsibilities towards the society.Business can also be viewed as acustodian of society's resources—people,raw materials, services andinfrastructure. To convert raw materialinto profitable goods, business needs.theinputs from the society and its output isconsumed by the society itself. Therelationship between business and societyis shown in Table 1.

values of our society". The definition ofCSR is not complex.

Scholars have taken varying stances onconceptualizing CSR. While some takeCSR as an obligation, others consider it asa strategic tool. According to Steiner(1972), "a social contract between businessand society that relates to the corporateimpact on the welfare of society".McWilliams and Siegel (2001) defines CSRin terms of actions that appear to furthersome social good, beyond the interest ofthe firm and that which is required by law.In the words of Campbell (2006) "CSR setsa minimum behavioral standard that aimsat doing no harm to stakeholders and if ithas happened then rectifies it as soon as itis identified". CSR is the alignment ofbusiness operations with social values.

Table 1: Relationship Between Business and SocietySociety Provides

Means of Exchange

Trained Manpower

Legal and Banking Systems

Social Infrastructure like Roads,Schools, Hospitals, etc.

Business Provides

Products and Services

Direct and Indirect Employment

Income Generation in Terms of Wages, Dividends,Taxes and Interests

Source: Centre for Corporate Research and Training (2003)

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)is what an organization does to influencethe society positively in which it exists. Theconcept of CSR has been evolving- fordecades. However, the modem era of socialresponsibility may be marked by Bowen's(1953) publication oí Social Responsibilitiesof the Businessman, considered by many tobe the first definitive book on the subject.He defines CSR as "an obligation to pursuethose policies, to make those decisions, orto follow those lines of action that aredesirable in terms of the objectives and

It takes into account the interests ofstakeholders, viz., employees, customers,shareholders and the community in thecompany's business policies and actions.CSR focuses on the social, environmentaland financial success of the company—theso-called triple bottom line or sustainabledevelopment—with the aim to achievesocial development.

BENEFITS OE CSR

Companies have been encouraged to adoptand expand CSR efforts as a result of

Volumen 48 N,[O.2

CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY INITIATIVES: AN ANALYSISOF VOLUNTARY CORPORATE DISCLOSURE

pressures from customers, employees,communities, investors, activistorganizations and other stakeholders. As aresult CSR has grown dramatically in recentyears (Centre for Corporate Research andTraining, 2003). Companies haveexperienced a range of bottom line benefitsfrom being engaged in CSR which include:

Improved Financial Performance andReduced Operating Costs: The desireand urge in business to be sensitive aboutsocial responsibility has a significantimpact on financial performance,resulting in increased revenues andreduced operating costs. The adoption ofsensitive attitude towards the communityforces business to strive for environmentalimprovements, for adopting eco-friendlymeasures, using less energy and material,waste management, etc. It is an old sayingthat there is wealth Ih industrial wasteand it needs only appropriate eyes toidentify that wealth. A project undertakento separate industrial waste in Tata Steelcost the company Rs. 100 lakh in the firstyear, as it invested in 400 bins but sellingthe waste earned it Rs. 20 cr (Agarwal,2008). A number of studies conducted inpast arrived at positive associationbetween CSR and financial performance(e.g., Preston and O'Bannon, 1997; Russoand Fouts, 1997; Sturdivant and Cinter,1977; Waddock and Graves, 1997; andRufeta!., 2001).

Enhanced Brand Image and Reputation:A company considered socially responsiblecan get benefit both by its enhancedreputation with the public as well as itsreputation within the businesscommunity. Contrast to this, thecompanies which are poor in social

responsibility suffer damages in the formof low sales, less investments, etc. Socialaction programs create favorable publicimage (Krishna, 1992; and Rashid andIbrahim, 2002). Hindustan Lever Ltd.(HLL) through its Surf Excel brandgained immeasurable reputation in thecourse of its campaign of education to poorchildren (http://living.oneindia.in). In asurvey conducted by Confederation ofIndian Industry (2002), majority of thecorporate respondents had the perceptionthat CSR leads to improved brand image.

Increased Sales and Customer Loyalty:A number of studies have suggested alarge and growing market for the productsand services produced by socially-responsible companies while the businessmust satisfy customer's key buying criteriasuch as price, quality, safety, durability,ease in handling and using the product.Creyer and William (1997) empiricallyproved that consumers expect firms toconduct business ethically, and they alsoshowed their willingness to reward ethicalbehavior and punish the unethicalbehavior of firms through their purchase,behavior. Mohr and Webb (2005):alstí)evidenced in their study that customersprefer to purchase from the companies'which are conscious about CSR;

Increased Ability to Recruit and RetainEmployees: Companies going for CSRfind it comparatively easy to recruit andretain the skilled employees for a sufficientlong period of time which are vital for thesuccess of business. This is empiricallytested and proved by Turban andCreening (1996) that corporate socialresponsibility is positively related to a firm'sattractiveness as an employer. In a

Volumen 49 N,lo.2

SOUTH ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT

subsequent study by Luce et al. (2001), itwas evidenced that corporate socialperformance is positively related to a firm'sfamiliarity which in turn affectsorganizational attractiveness as anemployer.

Government Support: Businessorganizations caring for their communityresponsibility get more cooperation andless queries from regulators, be itadministration or taxation officials(Agarwal, 2008). Companiesdemonstrating that they are engaged inpractices that satisfy and go beyond

. regulatory compliance requirements arebeing less scrutinized and are given freereign by both national and localgovernment entities (De andTayal, 2006).Such business houses get preferentialtreatment when applying for permits orlicenses to undertake any project.

Easier Access to Capital: Companiesengaged in CSR find it easy to raisecapital. The Social Investment Forumreports that in 1999 in the US there ismore than $2 tn assets under managementin portfolio that's linked to ethics, theenvironment and corporate socialresponsibility (Centre for CorporateResearch and Training, 2003).

CSR IN INDIA

In the context of India, CSR is not a newconcept. Businessmen were treated withgreat respect because of prevalence of theconcept of parting with one's wealth forthe benefit of the society. Merchants havealways been charitable and provided reliefin difficult times like droughts, famine orepidemics. Over the years this practiceremained same except shift from merchant

charity to corporate citizenship. In 1965,the Prime Minister of India presided overa national meeting that issued thefollowing declaration on socialresponsibilities of business: "...business hasresponsibility to itself, to its customers,workers, shareholders, and thecommunity...every enterprise, no matterhow large or small, must, if it is to enjoyconfidence, and respect, seek actively todischarge its responsibilities in alldirections, and not to one or two groups,such as shareholders or workers, at theexpense of community and consumer.Business must be just and humane as well.as efficient and dynamic" (Brown, 2001).A number of leading companies haverealized and recognized the concept ofsocial responsibility of corporate sector.A number of schools, colleges, hospitals,research institutions, technologicalinstitutes, management institutes,libraries, museums, have been set up withthe help of business comrnunity. Therehave been huge contributions from manybusinessmen for the poor and needy intimes of draughts, earthquakes, floods andother natural calamities (Sarkar, 2005).The increasing relevance of CSR in Indiahas stemmed from the fact that a businesscannot succeed by ignoring the humanand social needs of our society. Recentinterest in CSR at national orinternational level has emerged out ofcorporate misconduct. Especiallynoteworthy are the Santa Barba's(California) oil spill in 1969, UnionCarbide Tragedy in Bhopal in 1984(India), Exxon oil tanker grounding nearAlaska in 1989 and recent Enron financialscandal in the US. Smith (2003) notedthe formation of an association of 120

Volume 17 50 No. 2


LITERATURE RE VIEWcompanies across the world, called theWorld Business Council for SustainableDevelopment (WBCSD), giving a boostto CSR. The declaration by the UnitedNations of Millennium DeveloptrientGoals (MDGs), and the creatiori pf theUN Global Compact in 1999, have giyenimpetus to private-public partnership,aiming at social well-being throughcorporate responsibility. The attentiongiven to CSR by such international bodieshas underlined its significance.

In this age of widespreadcommunication and growing emphasis ontransparency, customers of any product orservice are unlikely to feel satisfied inbuying from a company that is seen toviolate the expectations of ethical andsocially responsible behavior. Therefore,the companies that pay genuine attentionto the principles of socially responsiblebehavior are favored by the public andpreferred for their goods and services.

OBJECTIVES

In the present scenario, where thecompanies are expected to be sociallyresponsible to legitimize their existence,it is necessary to see what the companiesare doing for their stakeholders and thesociety at large. In this light, the present.study has been conducted with thefollowing objectives:

• To examine the CSR initiativesbeing undertaken by the companiesoperating in India.

• To classify the companies into threecategories, viz., high, medium andlow CSR performers.

• To compare the CSR scores of high,medium and low CSR performers.

Various studies have been conducted toexamine the attitude of companiestowards CSR initiatives. Some of themare as follows:

Abbott and Monsen (1979): Heexamined the extent of corporate socialinvolvement of 450 firms out of Fortune500 firms. The researchers alsoinvestigated the impact of CSR oncorporate profitability. CSR' wasrheasured by applying content analysis ofthe annual reports for the year 1974 bygenerating Social InvolvementDisclosure (SID) index. The SID indexcovered the categories, viz.,environment, equal opportunity,personnel, community involvement andproducts. As per CSR disclosure, firmswere found to put maximum emphasis onenvironment (50%), followed by equalopportunity (32.2%). Personnel (29.4%)and community involvement (25.5%)didn't receive much importance by thefirms. Firms were found to put leastemphasis on products (10.5%). The firmsunder reference were divided into highand low groups on the basis of their socialinvolvement. All the firms were thenevaluated on the basis of theirprofitability in terms of return to investorsfor the period 1964-74. The researchersdiscovered little difference in investmentyield between firms in the two groups,even when controlling for size. In otherwords, no association was revealedbetween CSR and investors' rate ofreturn.

Krishna (1992): He examined theattitudes of managers of large-scale.

Volume 17 51 No. 2


enterprises towards GSR implementationas one of the objectives of his studyrelating to GSR. The study was based ona sample of 529 managers occupying topand middle positions in the managementhierarchy in public and private sectorundertakings in India. The data Werecollected through mailed questionnaire.The following were the findings of thesurvey: (1) Majority of the managersopined that there is a value change in thesociety and industry has a dominant rolein shaping the society into a socialisticsociety; (2) A good number of managerswere of view that there is a rise in publicdemand for socially responsible behaviorby industry; and (3) The following werethe important arguments in favor ofcorporate social responsibility: (a) socialaction prograrhs create a favorable publicimage; (b) social expectations are highand if ignored will result in the creationof public hostility towards industry;(c) involvement in social programs is amoral responsibility of the industry; (d) itis in the long-run interest of the companyto get directly involved in social issues;(e) industry has necessary resources andtalent to engage in social action programs;(0 the primary social areas of effort werefourid to be job creation, internal employeeservice programs and encouragingconsumerism; and (g) the secondarysocial areas of efforts were found to bepollution abatement, resourceconservation measures, society vimprovement programs and ruraldevelopment.

Teoh and Gregory Thong (1986): Theybelieved that the philosophy of topmanagement and legislation are theprimary factors contributing, to corporate

social awareness. The researchersobserved that nearly 49% of therespondents had the view that the socialresponsibility of business is reflected in theactive concern for the social impact ofeconomic activities of business.Malaysian-owned and British-ownedcompanies had the same view. In terms ofoverall involvement in social activities,human resources appeared to be the majorarea (71%). Product/Service to consumershad score of 70%. Not much number ofcompanies were found to be engaged inthe areas of community involvement(39%) and physical environment (37%).

Brown (2001): He presented a report ona survey conducted by Genter for SocialMarkets (GSM) to provide some insightinto modern Indian business andcorporate citizenship. The survey coveredcompanies from 10 different sectors,namely, management consultancy,information technology/softwaredevelopment, finance, engineering,chemical industry, construction industry,power generation, manufacturing,handicrafts/textiles and service industry.The following were some of the findingsof the survey: (1) 59% of the respondentsstated that they have policies in corporategovernance, 53% in environment, 53% inoccupational health and safety, 47% ineducation, 35% in anti-discrimination,29% in workers' rights. The above figuresshow that the companies are followingsocial actions in more than one area;(2) Regarding the main factors driving thechanging attitudes to social andenvironmental responsibility: increasingawareness and reputations topped the listfollowed by other GSR drivers like

Volume 17 52 No. 2


community group pressure and publicopinion; (3) Respondents-werê_^sked torate their company's main stakeholders on1-9 point scale, where 9 as the mostimportant and 1 as the least important.Respondents ranked customers as theirmost important stakeholders "followed byemployees, shareholders, investors,community, government authorities,unions, employees and others (suppliers,social organizations, etc.); and (4)Respondents mentioned the name ofcertain Indian and internationalcompanies as their role models in CSRsector. Birla Group of Companies, BSES,DSP Merril Lynch, Hindustan Lever,Infosys, ITC, Larsen and Toubro,Mahindra BT, Mitsui, Reliance as Indianrole models and IBM, EDS, Goodyear andConagra Inc. as international role rnodels.

Confederation of Indian Industry(2002) : It conducted a survey jointly withUNDP, The British Council andPricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC). Thepurpose was to ascertain the predominantperceptions on CSR in India and the rolethat companies define for themselves inthe society. Based on questionnaireresponses of 102 companies, the surveyrevealed: (1) The desire to be a goodcorporate citizen and improved brandimage are the main drivers of CSR amongcompanies; (2) Majority of respondents(81%) defined ethical requirements intheir corporate policies. Health and safetyrequirements by 76% and environmentalrequirement by 72% of the respondentcompanies. The above figures revealedthat the companies are involved in morethan one CSR area; (3) 55% of therespondents stated that the enabling

regulatory policy to promote CSR is theprovision of tax/duties and customsbenefits; and (4) Most of the companieswere of opinion that through the ethicalconduct of business, complying withregulatory requirements, environmentprotection, and employees' health andsafety would lead to higher future profits.

Rashid and Ibrahim (2002): Theyexamined the attitudes of Malaysianmanagers and executives towards socialresponsibility. For this purpose, theresearchers designed a questionnairewhich was distributed to the companiesfrom banking sector, telecommunicationindustry, manufacturing, and constructionsector. The main findings of the surveyare as follows: (1) Regarding attitudetowards CSR, 69.2% of the respondentsagreed that involvement by business inimproving community's quality of life willimprove its long run profitability; (2)65.2% of the respondents agreed that abusiness that wishes to capture a favorablepublic image will have to show that it issocially responsible; (3) Nearly 53.5% ofthe respondents agreed that simply beingefficient in producing goods or services isno longer the only thing the societyexpects from business organizations; (4)Regarding involvement in CSRi 91.8%stated that their companies are involvedin employees' welfare, 82.9% in responseto consumers' complaints, 76.7% inmaintaining product/service quality toconsumer, 62.3% in ensuring productsafety and 60.3% in donation to welfareorganizations, thereby revealing thatcompanies are involved in more than onearea; and (5) Regarding determinants ofCSR, family upbringing was found to be

Volume 17 53 N'fo.2

SOUTH ASIAN JOURNAL'OFt MANAGEMENT

the most influential factor followed bytraditional beliefs and customs, commonpractices in the industry, school oruniversity training. Overall, the findingsof the study revealed that Malaysianexecutives and managers had positive,attitude towards CSR.

Centre for Corporate Research andTraining (2003): It conducted a study tounderstand and review the CSRinitiatives of.NSE NIFTY companies. Thestudy is based on the data of 30 companieswhich were collected throughquestionnaires sent to the companies,annual reports of the companies,brochures published by the companies andother articles published about the CSRinitiatives of the companies in reputedjournals from time to time. The studyrevealed that most of the companies areactive in more than one socialresponsibility area. 80% of the companiesare participating in education andtraining programs, 66% in healthcare,60% in environment, 57% in welfare ofunderprivileged sections of society, 23%in rural development, 46% in naturalcalamity and 40% in any other categorycomprising of promotion of art and culture,empowerment of women, etc.

DATABASE

To validate a meaningful study, 13industrial sectors, viz., automobile,cement, fertilizers and chemicals, power,iron and steel, paints and varnishes, paper,drugs and pharmaceuticals, sugar, tea andcoffee, software, textile and industrialmachinery have been selected. Withineach industry, top 15 companies wereselected on the basis of their five-year(1999-2000 to 2003-2004) average sales.

The top companies were selected becausepast research has shown that largeenterprises regardless of industryclassification undertake more socialactivities than the smaller companies(Krishna, 1992). On the basis of five-yearaverage sales, initially it was started with195 companies. To begin with, aquestionnaire was developed and sent tothose 195 companies. The questionnairecovered various statements (representingvarious CSR actions) on 7-point Likert'sscale under different CSR dimensions. Itis appropriate to mention here that despiterigorous, consistent and close follow upwith the companies through telephone,courier and e-mail, only 22 filledquestionnaires were received leading toa poor response rate of 11.28%. Thisnecessitated the dropping ofquestionnaire-based method andadoption of annual reports and individualwebsites of the companies for CSR datacollection.

On the basis of availability of annualreports of the companies for year 2005-2006(i.e., the most recent period of the study)and the individual websites of thecompanies, finally, we were left with 93companies under 13 industrial sectorsconstituting the sample of the study. Allthe companies covered under the study arelisted under BSE/NSE. The list of selected93 companies (alongwith their respectivewebsites) spread over 13 industrial sectorsis given in the Appendix. Some companiesin the sample were December-ending.Therefore, the data have been collectedaccordingly. To have an update of CSRinformation, the websites of the companieshave been accessed from time to time onthe following dates:

Volumen 54 No. 2


(1) April end 2005; (2) August end2005; (3) December end 2005; (4) Marchend 2006; (5) June end 2006; (6) Augustend 2006.

METHODOLOGY

Although, the literature on CSR is nowsubstantial, measurement in this branch oforganizational research is undeveloped incomparison to measurement in other areas.The basic difficulty in measuring corporatesocial responsibility for the purpose ofresearch is the unavailability of detailedinformation of social activities that haverelevance for the general public. For thepurpose of research, furthermore, theactivities must be measured and reportedconsistently across a large number of firmsto enable statistical analysis. The problemis one of enlisting full cooperation frorn thefirms themselves to obtain suchinformation. An adequate measure ofcorporate social activities must be basedon the method of data collection in whichthe investigator (researcher, public interestgroup, government agency, corporateresearcher, etc.) has unrestricted access tothe data on full range of activities of thefirms. The contents of the scale must beindependently defined and must measureany form of behavior of public interest.

In order to measure corporate socialresponsibility, 'CSR -ineasurementinstrument' covering an inventory of 44items (sentences) under 7 CSRdimensions (content categories) relatingto CSR has been developed. CSRdimensions and items covered in the CSRmeasurement/instrument are based on thereview of literature (e.g., Abbott and

.. Monsén,, 1979; Krishna, 1992;^Brown,

2001; Confederation of Indian Industry,2002; Rashid and Ibrahim, 2002; andCentre for Corporate Research andTraining, 2003), scanning of annual reportsof Infosys, ITC, Wipro and Tata Group(the companies are considered as mostadmired ones in a survey conducted byCSM (Brown, 2001), and various CSRissues covered by Indian NGOs(www.IndianNGOs.com). After finalizingthe measurement instrument, contentanalysis of annual reports of the companiesand their individual websites have beenapplied to measure CSR in terms of CSRscores. The main reason for choosing thismethod is^annual reports are the maincorporate documents, which represent acompany and are widely used in variousstudies of CSR disclosure or CSRmeasurement (e.g., Abbott and Monsen,1979; and Parsa et ai. 2007). Likewise, itis evidenced by Esrock and Leichty(1998) that companies disclose theirinvolvement in CSR on their websites.

Content analysis can be defined as"... a technique that consists of codifyingqualitative information in anecdotal andliterary form into categories in order toderive quantitative scales of varying levelsof complexity" (Abbott and Monsen,1979). Different units of analysis can beused while codifying qualitativeinformation into quantitative format (i.e.,coded data). Most of the studies haveused one or a combination of words,sentences or pages as the unit of analysis.Counting number of words, sentences orpages can be problematic as there can beconsiderable differences in font sizes,styles of writing, margin sizes, graphics,etc., (Milne and Adler, 1999). Unerman

Volume 17 55 N,lo.2


(2000) argues that the method ofmeasurement is a crucial factor in contentanalysis research. Unerman is in favor ofusing the number of sentences to measurethe volume of disclosure as he claims thatthis may be done with less of judgment.Ingram and Frazier (1980) also stated thata sentence is easily identifiable and hasbeen selected as an appropriate unit insimilar studies. In the present study, atechnique similar to one adopted by Ernstand Ernst (1978), Abbott and Monsen(1979) and Parsa et al (2007) has beenused. That is a score of 1 assigned for everysentence (item) disclosed by the company.If no information item is disclosed, a scoreof 0 is assigned. In other words, all theitems in the measurement instrument aretreated as having equal importance (i.e.,equal weighting). The total score gainedby each company is, therefore, the totalnumber of information items that ' thecompany has disclosed.

ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

This section explains the extent of socialinvolvement of companies in terms of CSRscores obtained by them based on the CSRmeasurement instrument. CSR has beenmeasured both company-wise and item-wise explained as follows:

COMPANY-WISE CSR SCORE(OVERALL CSR SCORE)

Company-wise CSR score (overall CSRscores of the companies) in points has beenobtained by adding the score of each itemadopted by a company as disclosed by itin its annual report for the year 2005-2006or in its website. In percentage, theformula for computation of CSR score ofa company is:

CSR score of a company =

No. of CSR items adopted by a companyTotal No. of items in the CSR Measurement Instrument

xlOO

Company-wise CSR score has beencalculated in absolute values (in points)as well as in percentages so as to makeCSR scores of the companies comparable.Table 2 indicates' company-wise CSRscore.

It is clear fromTable 2 that CSR scoreranged from the lowest of 5 (11.36%) tothe highest of 34 (77.27%). RehanceEnergy Ltd. scored the highest (77.27%)on CSR score followed by AssociatedCement Companies and Gujarat AmbujaCements Ltd. with CSR scores of 72.73%and 65.91% respectively. Regarding thehighest score of Reliance Energy Ltd., thefinding is in consonance with Brown(2001) where in a survey conducted byCSM, the respondents mentioned thename of Reliance Group alongwith someother companies/groups as Indian rolemodels in CSR. Krishna LifestyleTechnologies Ltd. scored the lowest(11.36%) on CSR score. Monnet IspatLtd. and Assam Co. Ltd. are also low inCSR with CSR scores of 13.64% and18.18% respectively. High score showshigh involvement whereas low scoreindicates low involvement in CSR by thecompanies covered in the sample. Someof the companies reveal same CSR score,e.g., Tata Chemicals Ltd., SatyamComputer Services Ltd. scoring 61.36%;Wipro Ltd., Tata Sponge Iron Ltd., TataPower Co. Ltd., Tata Motors Ltd., TataSteel Ltd., Infosys Technologies Ltd. andChambal Fertilizers and Chemicals Ltd.scored 52.27% of the total CSR score.

Volume 17 56 N'[O.2


Table 2: Company-Wise CSR Score (Overall CSR Scores of the Companiesin Descending Order)

S. No.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

Name of Company

Reliance Energy Ltd.

Associated Cement Companies Ltd.

Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd.

Bajaj Auto Ltd.

Tata Chemicals Ltd.

Satyam Computer Services Ltd.

Tata Metaliks Ltd.

Orchid Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals Ltd.

Hero Honda Motors Ltd.

Steel Authority of India Ltd.

Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd.

Kansai Nerolac Paints Ltd.

Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd.

TVS Motor Company Ltd.

Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd.

Jindal Vijayanagar Steel Ltd.

Wipro Ltd.

Tata Sponge Iron Ltd.

Tata Power Company Ltd.

Tata Motors Ltd.

Tata Steel Ltd.

Infosys Technologies Ltd.

Chambal Fertilisers & Chemicals Ltd.

Tata Tea Ltd.

Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd.

West Coast Paper Mills Ltd.

Glaxosmithkline Pharmaceuticals Ltd.

Saurashtra Cement Ltd.

Kirloskar Ferrous Industries Ltd.

Ispat Industries Ltd.

Cujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Company Ltd.

Social Score(in points)

34

32

29

28

27

27

. 26

26

26

25

25

25

25

24

24

24

23

23

23

23

23

23

23

22

22

21

21

20

20

20

20

Social Score

(%)

77.27

72.73

65.91

63.64

61.36

61.36

59.09

59.09

59.09

56.82

56.82

56.82.

56.82..

54.55

54.55

54.55

52.27

52.27

52.27

52.27 .

. 52.27

52.27

52.27

50.00

50.00

47.73

47.73

45.45

45.45

45.45

45.45

Volume 17 57 No. 2


Table 2 (Cont.)

S. No.

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

39.

40.

41.

42.

43.

44.

. 45.

46.

47.

45.

49.

50.

51.

52.

53.

54.

55.

56.

57.

58.

59.

60.

61.

62.

Name of Company

Andhra Pradesh Paper Mills Ltd.

Alembic Ltd.

Rashtriya Chemicals &. Fertilizers Ltd.

Pfizer Ltd.

Novartis India Ltd.

Lupin Ltd.

Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Ltd.

Atlas Cycles (Haryana) Ltd.

Ashok Leyland Ltd.

Apeejay Tea Ltd.

Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd.

Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd.

Gujarat Industries Power Company Ltd.

CMC Ltd.

Alfa Laval (India) Ltd.

Raymond Ltd.

Harrisons Malayalam Ltd.

Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd.

Asian Paints (India) Ltd.

NIITLtd.

Vardbman Textiles Ltd.

Ugar Sugar Works Ltd.

Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd.

ICI India Ltd.

Goodricke Group Ltd.

Flat Products Equipments (India) Ltd.

Aurobindo Pbarma Ltd.

Zuari Industries Ltd.

Nicbolas Piramal India Ltd.

Flex Engineering Ltd.

Dbaramsi Morarji Cbemical Company Ltd.


20

20

19

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

17

17

17

17

17

16

16

16

16

15

14

14

14

14

14

14

14

13

13

13

13

Social Score

(%)

45.45

45.45

43.18

40.91

40.91

40.91

40.91

40.91

40.91

40.91

38.64

38.64

38.64

38.64

38.64

36.36

36.36

36.36

36.36

34.09

31.82

31.82

31.82

31.82

31.82

31.82

31.82

29.55

. 29.55

29.55

29.55

Volume 17 58 N,lo.2


Table 2 (Cont.)

S. No.

63.

64.

65.

66.

67.

68.

69.

70.

71.

72.

73.

74.

75.

76.

77.

78.

79.

80.

81.

82.

83.

84.

85.

86.

87.

88.

89.

90.

91.

92.

93.

Name of Company

Cipla Ltd.

Hexaware Technologies Ltd.

Gujarat Sidhee Cement Ltd.

EID-Parry (India) Ltd.

Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd.

Century Enka Ltd.

Birla Corporation Ltd.

Pudumjee Pulp & Paper Mills Ltd.

Maharashtra Scooters Ltd.

Madras Cements Ltd.

India Cements Ltd.

Disa India Ltd.

Berger Paints India Ltd.

Bannari Amman Sugars Ltd.

Aventis Pharma Ltd.

Swaraj Mazda Ltd.

Rainbow Papers Ltd.

OCL India Ltd.

Indo Rama Synthetics (India) Ltd.

Bajaj Tempo Ltd.

Seshasayee Paper & Boards Ltd.

Ipca Laboratories Ltd.

Eskay K'N'It (India) Ltd.

Eastern Silk Industries Ltd.

CESC Ltd.

Webel S L Energy Systems Ltd.

Simbhaoli Sugar Mills Ltd.

Sathavahana Ispat Ltd.

Assam Company Ltd.

Monnet Ispat Ltd.

Krishna Lifestyle Technologies Ltd.


13

12

12

12

12

12

12

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

10

10

10

10

10

9

9

9

9

9

8

8

8

8

6

5

Social Score(%)

29.55

nil

nil

nil

nil

n.nnil

25.00

25.00

25.00

25.00

25.00

25.00

25.00

25.00

22.73

22.73

22.73

22.73

22.73

20.45

20.45

20.45

20.45

20.45

18.18

18.18

18.18

18.18

13.64

11.36

Volume 17 5 9 No


ITEM-WISE CSR SCORE

Item-wise CSR score (in points) has been

calculated for each item included in CSR

measurement instrument by adding the

number of companies going for a particular

item.

In percentage, the formula for

computation of CSR score of each item is:

CSR score of each item =

No. of company going for a particular itemX 100

Total No. of companies in the sample

Table 3 reveals item-wise CSR scoreunder different CSR dimensions coveredunder CSR measurement instrument.Figures are shown in absolute values(in points) as well as in percentages forall the 44 items of the measurementinstrument.

A glance at this table reveals that thefirms are highly concerned about theirshareholders with the mean score of70.61%, recognizing the fact thatshareholders are the owners of theenterprises and business has primeresponsibility towards them. Aftershareholders, 50.40% of the firms havebeen found to be involved in the area of'human resources' followed by firms'involvement in the area of productcontribution and customers' relationswith the mean score of 49.46%.Statements shown in 'diversity' have theleast mean score of 17.74%.

Item-wise social involvement of thecompanies reveals that 100% of thecompanies covered under study provideretirement fund benefit plans, viz.,gratuity, provident fund, leave

Table 3: CSR Measurement Instrument: Item-Wise CSR Score

CSR Dimensions and ItemsScore

(in points)Score(%)

Community Involvement

Opening up or contributing towards educational institutions

Aid to flood/drought/disaster victims

Construction of roads

Contribution for the promotion of art and culture, and sports

Provision of drinking water facilities

Opening up or contributing towards healthcare organizationsor organizing health camps

Construction of temples, community halls, parks, etc.

Mean Score

51

11

10

29

11

34

19

25.14

54.84

23.66

10.75

31.18

11.83

36.56

, 20.43

27.04

Human Resources

Providing better working conditions to the employees

Retirement fund benefit plans, viz., gratuity, provident fund,leave encashment, etc.

Proper safety measures for accident prone activities

6

93

59

6.45

100.00

63.44

Volumen 60 No. 2 .


Table 3 (Cont.)

CSR Dimensions and Items

Frequent training/development programs for employees

Spending for the welfare of employees

Providing medical facilities to employees

Educational facilities to the children of employees

Profit sharing/share ownership programs for employees

Mean Score

Score(in points)

67

68

54

12

16

46.88

Score(%)

72.04

73.12

58.07

12.90

17.20

50.40

Environmental Contribution

Certified under ISO 14000 series

Going for land reclamation and afforestation

Purchased dust absorbing machine/installed effluent treatment plant

Going for rain harvesting programs

Recycling of pollutants and wastes

Investing in R&dD for energy conservation or efficient use of resources

Engaged in manufacturing eco-fnendly products/eco-fnendly process

Mean Score

68

37

25

17

40

91

22

42.86

73.12

39.79.

26.88

18.28

43.01

97.85

23.66

46.08

Product Contribution and Customer Relation

Investing in R&iD for improving product quality/new product/new process development

Certified under ISO 9000 series

Setting up after sale services centers or providing afi:er sales services

Product testing to ensure its quality and safety

Quick redressai of customers' complaints

Providing or modifying the product according to customers'requirements

Mean Score

86

79

21

24

25

41

46

92.47

84.95

22.58

25.81

26.88

44.09

49.46

Rural Development

Opening up dispensaries, hospitals or organizing medical campsin rural areas

Providing agriculture guidance

Introducing scheme for drip irrigation/recharging of wells

Developing infrastructure in rural areas

Opening up schools/colleges in rural areas

Providing safe drinking water facilities

31 ^

17

16

24

24-

17

33.33

18.28

17.20

25.81

25.81

18.28

Volume 17 61 No. 2

SOUTH ASIAN JOURNAL OE MANAGEMENT

Table 3 (Gont.)

CSR Dimensions and ítems

Promotion of rural income generation schemes

Mean Score

Score(in points)

. 12

20.14

Score(%)

12.90

21.66

Shareholders' Relations

Quick redressai of shareholders' grievances

Regular payment of dividend to shareholders

Quick transfer of shares

Mean Score

56

64

77

65.67

60.22

68.82

82.80

70.61

Diversity

Introduced scheme for women empowerment

Providing employment to SC/ST/BC and disabled persons

Different training programs for development of youth

Paying taxes in time to government

No child labor

Membership with some NGO for benefit of society

Mean Score

14

4

19

8

6

48

16.50

15.05

4.30

20.43

8.60

6.45

51.61

17.74

encashment, etc., followed by thecompanies (97.85%) engaged in investingin R&LD for energy conservation orefficient use of resources. Gompanies arehighly involved (92.47%) in 'investing inR&D for improving product quality/newproduct/ new process development. Verylow percentage of companies (6.45%)have policies for 'no child labor' and theleast percentage of companies (4.30%) are'providing employment to SG/ST/BG anddisabled persons'.

The detail item-wise GSR score undereach dimension is explained below:

Community Involvement: Gompaniesdepend ori the health, stability andprosperity of the communities in whichthey operate (Europeon Gommunities,2001). Therefore, an organization has to

be responsible for the welfare anddevelopment of the community arounditself. Responsibility of business towardssociety includes spending a part of itsprofit towards civic and educationalfacilities (Joshi and Kapoor, 2004). Thisdimension covers seven statements. Thecompanies are found to be highly involved(54.84%) in opening up or contributingtowards educational institutions followedby companies (36.56%) engaged inopening up or contributing towardshealthcare organizations or organizinghealthcare camps. With the populationexplosion in our country, the Governmenthas become handicapped to providehealthcare services and education tomillions of people. It is therefore, corporatesector has come to the picture. 31.18% ofthe companies are engaged in the

Volumen ^ 2 No.2


promotion of art/ culture and sports. Thecompanies, being corporate citizensprovide health services and support toeducational institutional/culturalrecreational activities (Kumar, 1996).Every year, our country experiences floods,draughts and other natural calamities.Some companies taking this as their socialresponsibility contribute towards thevictims of such calamities. 23.66% of thecompanies covered under study areinvolved in this CSR activity. Not manycompanies are involved in the areas ofconstruction of temples, community halls,parks, etc., provision of drinking waterfacilities, and construction of roadsindicating 20.43%, 11.83% and 10.75%score respectively. The mean score ofcommunity involvement is 27.04%,thereby revealing that not much numberof companies is contributing towardscommunity development programs. Hère,the results reinforce the findings of Abbottand Monsen (1979), Teoh and GregoryThong (1986) and Krishna (1992), in thesense that community involvementprograms do not receive much importanceby the firms.

Human Resources: This dimensioncovers eight statements. Human resourcesconstitute an important segment of society.No organization can be successful withoutwhole-hearted cooperation of employees.It is to be noted here that a good andhealthy human resource is the gatewayto success and the harbinger of progressof any organization as cock is to the dawn(Sarkar, 2005). Retirement fund benefitplans, viz., gratuity, provident fund, leaveencashment, etc. have been practiced by100% of the companies. In the present era

of socioeconomic setup, the employeescannot be treated as mere means to ends.The employees should be provided withall sorts of comforts and mental boosts-upto bear the work load. The study revealsthat 73.12% of the companies is spendingfor the welfare of their employees whichare in consonance with the findings byRashid and Ihrahim (2002) where a goodpercentage of companies is found to beengaged in employees* welfare programs.72.04% of the companies are providingtraining programs to the employees toupgrade their skill since the role ofknowledge workers is increasing day byday. Mere engagement of workforce is notsuffice to achieve success unless theworkforce are really well conversant withthe work method and work strategy soprovided by the management of businessenterprises. Thus it is always advisable toimpart adequate training among theemployees in the relevant subject or areaconcerning their employment on regularbasis. 63.44% of the companies areproviding proper safety measures foraccident prone activities followed by58.07% of the companies providingmedical facilities to the employees whichare in line with the findings by Brown(2001) who revealed moderate percentageof companies to be engaged inoccupational health and safety programs.Profit-sharing/share-ownership programsfor employees are being provided by17.20% of the companies whereas 12.90%of companies are providing educationalfacilities to the wards of their employees.As per disclosure, least percentage ofcompanies (6.45%) is providing betterworking conditions to the employees. The

Volume 17 63 N a 2


mean score of human resources categoryis 50.41%, thereby revealing thatcompanies are moderately involved in thisarea of CSR. Here, the results arecontrary to the findings by Teoh andGregory Thong (1986) which revealedgood percentage of companies to beconcerned about their human resources.Again the results are divergent to thefindings by Krishna (1992) in the sensethat internal employee service programsare among the primary areas of socialconcern by the firms.

Environmental Contribution: A firmcannot ignore the problems of theenvironment in which it operates(Tsoutsoura, 2004). It is a proven that thebusiness and industrial houses emanatehuge amount of toxic and otherbiodegradable waste and effluents into theenvironment without treating them whichendanger the environment. Naturallythere arises a social consensus to ask thebusiness communities to shoulder thesocial responsibility to take necessarymeasures to make the environmentpollution free as far as practicable. Ingeneral, reducing the consumption ofresources or reducing polluting emissionscan reduce environmental impact.Individual companies have found that lessuse of resources can lead to increasedprofitability and competitiveness. Theseenvironmental investments are normallyreferred to as win-win opportunities, goodfor business and good for environment(European Communities, 2001). Needlessto say that protecting and improving theenvironment is a global issue. In India,environment audit has been madecompulsory for all industries. The Ministry'

of Environment and Forests of India issuedan official notification in March 1993under the Environmental Protection Act,1986. As per this notification, all theindustries are required to submit an auditreport to the Government just as they arerequired to submit annual financialstatements at the end of each year(Kumar, 1996). Seven items of informationhave been included in this contentcategory of CSR measurement instrument.Investing in R&D for energy conservationor efficient use of resources showed goodpercentage score (97.85%) followed by73.12% of the companies havingcertification under ISO 14000 seriesregarding environment managementsystem. 43.01% of companies are going forrecycling of pollutants and wastes. 39.79%of the companies are going for landreclamation and afforestation activities.26.88% of the companies have purchaseddust absorbing machine or installed aneffluent treatment plant. 23.66% of thecompanies are engaged in producing eco-friendly products/eco-friendly process.The least percentage of companies(18.28%) is going for rain harvestingprograms. The mean score of companiescontributing towards environmentthrough different environmentalactivities is 46.09%, thereby showing thatcompanies in the sample are moderatelycontributing towards environment. It isworth mentioning here that the findingsare in consonance with Brown (2001) whoobserved that reasonable percentage offirms have policies on environment.Likewise, Centre for Corporate Researchand Training (2003), also found thatmoderate number of firms are participatingin environment related programs.

Volume 17 64 No. 2


Product Contribution and Customers'Relations: Business should provide qualityproducts to the consumers (Joshi andKapoor, 2004). Products should be testedfor safety. Business should invest in R&Dfor improving product/service quality ornew product development. After-salesservices related to the products should beprovided. Business must satisfy customers'key buying criteria, like price, quality,appearance, taste, availability, safety andconvenience (Centre for CorporateResearch & Training, 2003). The interestsof the customers can be bettersafeguarded by providing them products(services) of better quality, according totheir requirements and attending to theirgrievances without any delay. Sixstatements have been included in thiscontent category. The averagepercentage of companies who areconcerned about their products (services)and customers is 49.46%, therebyrevealing moderate number of companiesto be engaged in this area. Here, theresults are contrary to the findings byAbbott and Monsen (1979) who revealedleast involvement of the companies in thisCSR area. However, Teoh and GregoryThong (1986) found good percentage ofcompanies giving concern to theirproduct/service to consumers. Maximumpercentage of companies (92.47%) areinvesting in R&D for improving productquality/product development/processdevelopment. Here, the results are inconformity with those of Rashid andIbrahim (2002) who found a good

' percentage of companies to be engagedin maintaining product/service quality.84.95% of companies are certified under

ISO 9000 series for ensuring better qualityproducts to the consumers. In the presentera, companies are now taking intoconsideration customers' liking anddisliking. 44.09% of companies provideand modify the products according tocustomers' requirements. Very lesspercentage of companies, i.e., 26.88%provide quick redressai (within a periodof 30 days) of customers' complaints whichare contrary to the finding by Rashid andIbrahim (2002) who revealed adequatepercentage of companies to be engagedin this area. The said period of 30 days isconsidered reasonable as it has beenobserved (as mentioned in the annualreports) that most of the companies havetaken 30-days period for redressai ofcustomer grievances. 25.81% of companiesgo for product testing to ensure the safetyand quality of the products. In thiscategory, the least percentage ofcompanies (22.58%) are providing after-sales services to the customers.

Rural Development: Seven items areincluded in this content category. Ruraldevelopment implies both the economicbetterment of people as well as greatersocial transformation of the people livingin rural areas. In order to provide the ruralpeople with better prospects for economicdevelopment, increased participation ofpeople in the rural development programs,decentralization of planning, betterenforcement of land reforms and greateraccess to credit are envisaged (http://rural.nie.in/il.htm). In this category,maximum percentage of companies(33.33%) are found to be taking care ofhealth of rural people by opening uphospitals, dispensaries or organizing

Volume 17 65 N'[o.2


medical camps in rural areas. This activityof rural development is followed bydeveloping infrastructure and opening upschools and educational institutions inrural areas by 25.81% of the companies.18.28% of companies are engaged inproviding agriculture guidance andproviding safe drinking water facilities inrural areas. 17.20% of companies areengaged in introducing scheme for dripirrigation/recharging of wells. In thiscategory, least percentage of companies(12.90%) are engaged in the promotionof rural income generation schemes. Theoverall mean score of the companies goingfor rural development is 21.66%. Here, thefindings are in conformity with Krishna(1992) and Centre for Corporate Researchand Training (2003) who observed thatnot many companies are involved in ruraldevelopment programs.

Shareholders' Relations: Shareholdersinvest their hard-earned disposablesurplus in the business world with acherished desire to earn income as areturn therefrom. CSR involves a concernprimarily with those stakeholders whohave power to influence the organization.If the shareholders don't get adequatereturn on the investments made by themthen they will hesitate to invest additionalfunds in the firm (Joshi and Kapoor, 2004).Therefore, a firm should have regulardividend scheme for shareholders. Underpresent SEBI guidelines, firms have to bemaking distributable profits in three of thepreceding five years (i.e., 60%) to beeligible to offer IPOs (www.rediff.com/business/2 000/j un/14sebi. htm). Therefore,firms making payment of dividend in threeout of five years (2002-2006; the most

recent period of the study) are consideredas socially responsible in terms of theirresponsibility towards shareholders. Theirrequests for transfer of shares should beprocessed in time (within one month). Forexample, it is proposed that an investormay make any claim, difference or disputeagainst a company for delay in transfer ofsecurities beyond the specified time of onemonth from the receipt of securities by thecompany. This shall be referred to anddecided by arbitration under the "Rules,Bye-Laws &. Regulations" of the BombayStock Exchange (BSE) for the purpose ofsettling investor grievances. The companyshall be liable to compensate the aggrievedparty for the opportunity losses, if any,caused during the period of delay(www.iepf.gov.in./InvestorGrievances_BSE.asp). Investor grievances should beredressed promptly (within 30 days). Forexample, where a dividend has beendeclared by a company but has not beenpaid, or the warrant in respect thereof hasnot been posted within 30 days frorn thedate of declaration, to any shareholderentitled to the payment of the dividend,every director of the company shall, if heis knowingly a party to the default, bepunishable (under Section 207 ofCompanies Act; 1956 Bare Act) withsimple imprisonment for a term which mayextend to three years and shall also beliable to a fine of Rs. 1000 for every dayduring which such default continues andthe company shall be liable to pay simpleinterest at the rate of 18% per annumduring the period for which such defaultcontinues (www.vakilnol.com/bareacts/companiesact/s207.htm). A goodpercentage of companies (82.80%) havesystem for quick transfer of shares (within

Volume 17 66 No. 2


a period of one month of filing/submittinga request). 68.82% of the companies areregularly paying dividend, to theirshareholders (payment for three out of fiveyears). 60.22% of the companies arepaying attention to the quick redressai ofshareholders' grievances (within a periodof 30 days from the date of filing acomplaint). The mean score of this GSRcategory is 70.61% which is the highestof all the remaining six categories therebyrevealing that the firms are very muchconcerned about their responsibilitytowards their shareholders. Here, theresults are in conformity with theGrowther (2004) who noted thatorganizations are most concerned withthe shareholders in comparison to otherstakeholders.

Diversity: It constitutes the remainingitems which are not covered in any of theabove dimensions of GSR measurementinstrument. Erom the Eifth Eive Year Plan(1974-78) onwards, there has been amarked shift in the approach to women'sissues from welfare to development.In recent years, the empowerment ofwomen has been recognized as the centralissue in determining the status of women.The National Gommission for Women wasset up by an Act of Parliament in 1990 tosafeguard the rights and legal entitlementsof women. India has also ratified variousinternational conventions and humanrights instruments committing to secureequal rights of women. Key among themis the ratification of the Gonvention onElimination of all Eorms of DiscriminationAgainst Women (GEDAW) in 1993(http://wcd.nic.in/empwomen.htm).Industrial sectors are also emphasizing on

women empowerment. Earlier, womencould not work in night shifts even if theywanted. Now, suitable measures are takento enable them to work in night shifts infactories. This is accompanied withsupport services for security,transportation, etc. The support servicesinclude childcare facilities like crèchesat workplaces, home for the aged anddestitute, health and personal hygieneprogram for women, educational facilitiesfor women, establishment of women selfhelp groups, etc. to create an enablingenvironment and to ensure their fullcooperation in work. Regarding childlabor, the Government of India issued anotice on August 1, 2006 concerning banon employment of children under the ageof 14 years. The Government stated thatthe violators could face upto two yearsimprisonment and a fine upto 20,000rupees or both (International HeraldTribune, 2006).

This dimension has the least meanvalue, i.e., 17.74% as compared to otherGSR dimensions thereby revealing verylow percentage of companies going for theactivities covered under it. In thiscategory, maximum companies (51.61%)have membership with some NGO for thebenefit of society at large. 20.43% of thecompanies have introduced differenttraining programs for the development ofyouth. Schemes for women empowermentshowed the score of 15.05%. Only 8.60%of the firms are paying taxes in time tothe Government, rest have liability of taxpayment for more than six months fromthe date they became payable. Toovercome the deadlock and to check theunflinching practice of taxpayers to evade

Volumen 67 No. 2


tax, governments of different countrieshave taken various tax reform measuresfor greater interest of their economies byplugging the loopholes of tax legislation,like tax compliance is achieved on a largescale. As per disclosure, 6.45% of thecompanies are against the employment ofchild labor. According to governmentfigures, there are nearly 13 million childworkers in India. In India, although lawshave been framed banning child labor inhazardous industries, regulations arewidely ignored and tens of thousands ofchildren continue to work in factories.Social activists say that merely tighteningthe laws will not eliminate child labor, aspoor parents put their children to work assoon as possible to contribute to the familyincome. Instead, the social activists saythat efforts should be made to reduce theabject poverty that drives people to pushtheir children into hazardous jobs(International Herald Tribune, 2006).Least percentage of companies (4.30%)is providing employment to SC/ST/BC anddisabled persons.

.Item-wise CSR score reveals that thecompanies in the sample are involved inmore than one CSR area. Here thefindings are in consonance with Brown(2001), Confederation of Indian Industry(2002), Rashid and Ibrahim (2002),Centre for Corporate Research andTraining (2003) where the firms coveredin their studies were found to be engagedin more than one CSR area.

CLASSIFICATION OFCOMPANIES INTO HIGH,MEDIUM AND LOW CSRPERFORMERS

It. is possible to divide the data of overallCSR scores (Table 2) into a little finerand more revealing detail. The companiescovered under study have been dividedinto three categories, viz., high, mediumand low CSR performers on the basis oftheir overall CSR scores. In line withBowman and Haire (1975), median (as ameasure of average) of CSR score hasbeen computed. Since median is theappropriate average in dealing withqualitative data that can't be measuredbut scored (Gupta, 2005). In the presentstudy, CSR data is of qualitative naturewhich necessitated the use of median asaverage. The firms clustered around themedian figure can appropriately bedescribed as devoting a medium amountof attention to the issue (i.e., CSR), belowthat range a less amount of attention andbeyond the medium range, a high amountof attention. To be more precise and clear,median of CSR score which came out tobe 36.36% has been computed and ± 20%of median (i.e., 29.09% - 43.64%) to findout the companies which we call mediumCSR performers. Less than 20% belowmedian (i.e., <29.09%) represents thecategory of low CSR performers, and morethan 20% above median (i.e., >43.64%)represents the category of high CSRperformers. This criterion of CSRclassification was followed by Bowmenand Haire (1975) in classification of thecompanies covered by Bragdon andMarlin (1972) in their study relating topollution control (as a substitute of CSR).Table 4 shows the classification ofcompanies covered under study into threeCSR categories of high, medium and lowCSR performers.

Volumen 68 No. 2


Table 4: Classification of Companies into High,Mediuni and Low CSR Performers

High (>43.64%)

Bajaj Auto Ltd.


Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd!


Tata Motors Ltd.


Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd.


Saurashtra Cement Ltd.

Chambal Fertilizers andChemicals Ltd.

Gujarat Narmada ValleyFertilizers Company Ltd.

Tata Chemicals Ltd.

Neyveli Lignite Corporation. Ltd.





Kirloskar Ferrous Inds. Ltd.


Tata Steel Ltd.

Tata Metaliks Ltd.





Alembic Ltd.

GlaxosmithklinePharmaceuticals Ltd.

Orchid Chemicals &Pharmaceuticals Ltd.


Medium (29.09% - 43.64%)

Ashok Leyland Ltd.


Dharamsi Morarji ChemicalCompany Ltd.

Gujarat State Fertilizers &Chemicals Ltd.

Rashtriya Chemicals &Fertilizers Ltd.


Gujarat Industries PowerCompany Ltd.


ICI India Ltd.


Aurobindo Pharma Ltd!

Cipla Ltd.


Lupin Ltd.

Nicholas Piramal India Ltd.

Novartis India Ltd.

Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd

Pfizer Ltd.



Apeejay Tea Ltd.



CMC Ltd.

NUT Ltd.

Raymond Ltd.

Vardhman Textiles Ltd.


Flat Products Equipments(India) Ltd.

Low (< 29.09%)

Bajaj Tempo Ltd.

Maharashtra Scooters Ltd.

Swaraj Mazda Ltd.


Gujarat Sidhee Cement Ltd.

India Cements Ltd.

Madras Cements Ltd.

OCL India Ltd.

CESC Ltd.


Monnet Ispat Ltd.



Pudumjee Pulp &Paper Mills Ltd.

Rainbow Papers Ltd.

Seshasayee Paper &Boards Ltd.

Aventis Pharma Ltd.


Bañnari Amman Sugars Ltd." ' '




Assam Company Ltd.


Century Enka Ltd.



Indo Rama Synthetics(India) Ltd.

Krishna LifestyleTechnologies Ltd.

Volume 17 69 No. 2


Tablé;;4 (Cont.)

High (>43.64%)

Tata Tea Ltd.



Wipro Ltd.

N = 33

Medium (29.09% - 43.64%)


N=30

Low (< 29.09%)

Disa India Ltd.

N=30

Table 4 reveals that 33 companies arein high CSR category, 30 in medium and30 in low CSR category. In other words,33 companies are high CSR performers,30 are moderate CSR performers andagain 30 are low CSR performers.

COMPARISON OF CSR SCORESOF HIGH, MEDIUM AND LOWCSR PERFORMERS

After classifying the companies into threecategories, viz., high, medium and lowCSR performers on the basis their overallCSR scores, it is necessary to compare thescores of high, medium and low CSRperformers. Kruskal-Wallis test which is anonparametric alternative test to ANOVAtest, has been applied for comparisonbetween the three categories ofcompanies. Accordingly the followinghypothesis has been formulated:

Hg : There is no significant difference

between the average overall CSR

scores of high, medium and low

CSR performers.

For Kruskal-Wallis test, descriptivestatistics of overall CSR scores of high,medium and low CSR performers havebeen worked out which have beenpresented in Table 5.

Table 5 reveals the mean scores of high(54.-682%), medium (35.784%) and low(22.701%) CSR performers with

coefficients of variation of 14.094%,12.525% and 17.827%, respectively. Thisindicates that there is the highestvariation in the scores of low CSRperformers and the least variation in thescores of medium CSR performers.Table 6 reveals the results of Kruskal-Wallis test.

A glance at Table 5 reveals that theaverage overall CSR scores of high,medium and low CSR performers differsignificantly. This means that the averageoverall CSR score of high CSR performersis significantly higher than the averageoverall scores oí medium and low CSRperformers. In other words, the firms inthe three categories are not evenlyengaged in the CSR. To be more specific,to see where the actual difference lies,pair-wise comparison of the threecategories of companies for their averageoverall CSR scores has been done byapplying Mann-Whitney ü-test .Accordingly, for comparison of CSR scoresof companies in the three pairs of high-medium, medium-low and high-low CSRperformers, the following hypothesis hasbeen formulated:

HgiThere is no significant difference

between the pairs of high-

medium, medium-hw and high-

low CSR performers for their

average overall CSR scores.

Volume 17 70 N a 2


Table 5: Descriptive Statistics of CSR Scores of High,Medium and Low CSR Performers

Companies' Categories

High CSR Performers

Medium CSR Performers

Low CSR Performers

Mean Score (%)

54.68235.78422.701

Standard Deviation(%)

7.7074.4824.047

Coefficient ofVariation (%)

14.09412.52517.827

Table 6: Kruskal-Wallis Test for Difference in Average Overall CSR Scoresof High, Medium and Low CSR Performers

Companies' Categories

High CSR Performers

Medium CSR Performers

Low CSR Performers

Total

X^ (significance level)

No. of Companies

33

30

30

93

81.931

Mean Ranks

77.0045.5015.50

(0.000)***

Note: *** Significant atp < 0.01, Figures in parenthesis represent p-values.

Results of Mann-Whitney ü-test areshown in Table 7.

A glance at Table 7 makes it clear thatthe null hypotheses is rejected for all thepairs thereby revealing that there is asignificant difference {p < 0.01) betweenall the pairs of CSR performers, viz., high-medium, medium-low and high-low fortheir average overall CSR scores. Thismeans that the average overall CSR scoreof high CSR performers is significantlyhigher than the average overall CSR scoreof medium CSR performers. Likewise, theaverage overall CSR score of medium CSR

overall CSR score of high CSR performersis significantly higher than the averageoverall CSR score of low CSR performers.

FINDINGS

On the basis of foregoing analysis of CSRpractices followed by the companiesoperating in India on the basis of company-wise social involvement and item-wisesocial involvement, the following findingshave been revealed:

• Maximum corporate socialinvolvement has been found byReliance Energy Ltd. {11.11%),

Table 7: Mann-Whitney U-Test for Pairwise Comparison of Average OverallCSR Scores Between High, Medium and Low CSR Performers

Pairs of Companies' Categories

High-Medium

Medium-Low

High-Low

Mean Rank

47.00-15.5045.50-15.5047.00-15.50

Z (Sig. Level)

-6.833 (0.000)***

-6.674 (0.000)***

-6.829 (0.000)***

Note: *** Significant at p < 0 .01, Figures in parenthesis represent p-values.

performers is significantly higher than theaverage overall CSR score of low CSRperformers. In the same way, the average

followed by Associated Cement Co.Ltd. (72.73%) and Gujarat AmbujaCement Ltd. (65.91%). Least

Volume 17 71 N,I0.2


involvement in corporate socialpractices has been.found by KrishnaLifestyle Technologies Ltd. (11.36%),followed by Monnet Ispat Ltd.(13.64%) arid Assam Go. Ltd. with18.18% GSR score.

Gonsidering the seven GSRdimensions, it is found that firms arehighly concerned about theirshareholders with the highest meanscore of 70.61% recognizing the factthat shareholders are the owners of theenterprise and business has primeresponsibility towards them. Aftershareholders, firms are found to beconcerned about their humanresources (50.40%) followed by firms'involvement (49.46%) in the area ofproduct contribution and customers'relations. Likewise,, firms are found tobe giving reasonable amount ofattention towards environment withthe mean score of 46.09%. It is revealedthat the programs relating tocommunity involvement scoring27.04% and rural development scoring21.66% do not receive much emphasisby the firms covered under the study.The dimension 'diversity' has the meanscore of 17.74% which has shown theleast interest of the companies for theitems given thereunder.

Item-wise analysis revealed that 100%of the companies are engaged in.providing retirement fund benefitplans, viz., gratuity, provident fund,leave encashment, etc., followed byfirms (97.85%) engaged in investingin R&D for energy conservation orefficient use of resources and firms

(92.47%) going for investing in R&Dfor improving product quality/newproduct/new process development.The least percentage of companies(4.30%) has been found engaged inthe area of providing employment toSG/ST/BG and disabled personsfollowed by 6.45% of the companieshaving policies for 'no child labor'.Thus item-wise analysis revealed thatfirms covered under the study areactive in more than one GSR area.

• Kruskal-Wallis test has shownsignificant difference between high,medium and low GSR performers fortheir average overall GSR scores.Regarding pair-wise comparison, theresults of Mann-Whitney ü-test revealsignificant differences between all thepairs of high-medium, medium-lowand high-low GSR performers for theiraverage overall GSR scores.

IMPLICATIONS ANDCONCLUSIONThis study made it clear that the extentof social involvement varies from firm tofirm. Some firms are highly involved, somemoderately involved while others lowlyinvolved into GSR practices. Besides, itis revealed that some areas receive muchimportance in comparison to others byalmost all the firms. Gonsidering thepositive outcomes of GSR, in the presentscenario of growing transparency, anumber of companies are going for GSRprograms in one form or another. Eorexample, IDEA Gellular Ltd. started amovement called 'Tald for India Hour' inwhich the subscribers were made awarethat the revenue collected from the calls

Volume 17 72 No. 2


made by them between 8.36 pm to 9.36 pmwould be donated for some social cause.At the end of this movement, the companycollected approximately Rs. 1.25 cr.Afterwards, the company doubled theamount and donated Rs. 2.50 cr for PrimeMinister's National Defence Fund(www.indiaprline.com). Further, Nokiainitiated a step for its commitment to theenvironment. Nokia Malaysia's IntegratedNokia Kiosk (INK) provides customers areally simple way to recycle their old mobilephones and accessories as well as get theircurrent Nokia devices serviced. Here, theaim of the company is to promote lowcarbon economies and sustainablelifestyles. This is a collaboration projectwith WWF Indonesia and EquinoxPublishing whereby Nokia has committedfunds towards planting of 100,000 trees inSebangau National Park in CentralKalimantan, Indonesia (http://pressbulletinboard.nokia.com). HLL'sinvention of Surf Excel Quick Wash cansave upto two buckets of water which isverified by an external NGO(www.hul.co.in/sustainability/Brands/Eco-innovation.aspx). This is the contributionof HLL towards water conservation.

Government should take legislativemeasures to force all the business units tocontribute something for social welfare.Besides legislative measures, awarenessabout social responsibility should becreated. Business should prepare a code ofethics for social upliftment. The companylaw can also make a provision to make itobligatory for units having investmentbeyond a certain limit to spend a part oftheir profits on social welfare activities. Themanagers should not think CSR as an extra

activity rather it should be considered asan actual way of doing business. Theyshould not consider it as an optionalactivity rather it should be a part ofmanagement's operations. The companiesshould also show in their balance sheetsthe amount they have spent on socialobligations. Now, the fundamental need isto manage the ethical and social issues asrigorously and objectively as other corebusiness issues because:

• If the corporate demands the right tohire and fire, it must also fulfil itsresponsibility towards the employeesand invest in developing their skillsand potential.

• If it is the right of the business to haveadequate infrastructure, it is also itsresponsibility to provide the same forits employees—canteen, portabledrinking water, clean air in theworkplace, transportation andadequate lighting conditions.

• If it is the right of every industry tohave access to quality inputs andimports (power, water, raw materials)it is also its responsibility to producequality products to achieve customersatisfaction and to keep theenvironment clean.

• if it is the right of every business toflourish, it is also its responsibility toassist the growth of its employees, thesociety and the nation.

LIMITATIONS AND FURTHERRESEARCH

The present study is subject to somelimitations. The first limitation is that

Volume 17 73 N,lo.2


since CSR is a multidimensional concept,the list of CSR statements covered underCSR Measurement Instrument may notbe extensive. Besides, CSR measurementis based on self-reported disclosures (i.e.,annual reports and websites of companies)by the companies. The informationdisclosed by the companies may not be thetrue reflection of actual CSR practicesfollowed by them. There are theoreticalreasons to expect the firm to under reportits social involvement activities. Since,social activities involve costs, reading ofsuch activities by shareholders may doubtthem regarding firm's ability to use theirresources for maximizing their wealth. Onthe other hand, the firm may over reportsuch activities so as to enhance investors'confidence in the firm. Over-reporting orunder-reporting of such activities mayproduce biased results. Another limitationis that the present study simply focuseson CSR areas in which the firms areinvolved. The intensity of each CSRactivity has not been checked.Considering the above limitations, it issuggested that in addition to focusing onCSR areas in which the firms are involved,the intensity of each item should bechecked. In other words, research isneeded to investigate what levels ofinvestment in corporate social actions areprofitable for a firm which may producemore meaningful results. Moreover, bettermeasures of CSR are desperately needed.Therefore, research in this area couldfocus on the perceptions on CSR. Regularsurveys of business people, businesswriters, business school faculty and thepeople at large may give researchersreliable measures of CSR for futurestudies.

Acknowledgment: The authors gratefully

acknowledge the valuable observations of anonymous

referees on an earlier draft of this paper

REFERENCES

1. Abbott W F and Monsen J R (1979),"On the Measurement of CorporateSocial Responsibility: Self-ReportedDisclosure as a Method of MeasuringCorporate Social Involvement",Academy of Management Journal,Vol. 22, No. 3, pp. 501-515.

2. Agarwal S K (2008), Corporate SocialResponsibility in India, Response Books,New Delhi.

3. Bowman E H and Haire M (1975),"A Strategic Posture TowardCorporate Social Responsibility",California Management Review,Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 49-58.

4. Bowen H R (1953), SocialResponsibilities of the Businessman,Harper & Row, New York.

5. Bragdon J H and Marlin J A T(1972), "Is Pollution Profitable?", RiskManagement, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 9-18.

6. Brown K (2001), "Corporate SocialResponsibility: Perceptions of IndianBusiness", in Mehra M (Ed.),available at www.csmworld.org/public/pdf/s ocia l_respons.pdf,accessed on October 15, 2004.

7. Campbell J L (2006), "InsriturionalAnalysis and the Paradox ofCorporate Social Responsibility",American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 49,No. 7, pp. 925-938.

8. Cannon T (1994), CorporateResponsibility-A Textbook of Business

Volumen 74 No. 2


Ethics, Covemance, Environment: Roleand Responsibilities, Pitam Publishing,London.

9. Centre for Corporate Research andTraining (2003), "Corporate SocialResponsibility: Initiatives of NSENifty Companies: Content,Implementation Strategies andImpact", available atwww.nseindia.com, accessed onOctober 16, 2004.

10. Confederation of Indian Industry(2002), "Corporate SocialResponsibility Survey 2002 - India",available at www.ciionline.org,accessed on September 20, 2004.

11. Creyer E and William T R Jr. (1997),"The Influence of Firm Behavior onPurchase Intention: Do ConsumersReally Care About Business Ethics?",Journal of Consumer Marketing,Vol. 14,No. 6, pp. 421-432.

12. Crowther D (2004), "Corporate SocialReporting: Genuine Action orWindow Dressing?", in D Crowtherand L Rayman-Bacchus (Eds.),Perspectives on Corporate SocialResponsibility, pp. 140-160, Ashgate,Aldershot.

13. Davis K and Frederick W C (1985),Business and Society, McGraw-Hill,Singapore.

14. De K K and Tayal S K (2006),"Corporate Social Responsibility:Indian Content", DIAS TechnologyReview the International Journal forBusiness & IT, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 34-45.

15. Ernst and Ernst (1978), SocialResponsibility Disclosure, 1978 Survey,Ernst & Ernst, Ohio, Cleveland.

16. European Communities (2001),"Promoting European Framework forCorporate Social Responsibility-Green Paper", available atwww.europa.eu.int, accessed onSeptember 22, 2005.

17. Esrock S L and Leichty G B (1998),"Social Responsibility and CorporateWeb Pages: Self-Presentation orAgenda-Setting?", Public RelationsReview, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 305-319.

18. Gupta S P (2005), Statistical Methods,Sultan Chand & Sons, New Delhi.

19. Ingram R W and Frazier K B(1980), "Environmental Performanceand Corporate Disclosure", Journalof Accounting Research, Vol. 18,No.2, pp. 614-622.

20. International Herald Tribune (2006),"India Expands Laws Against ChildLabour", available at www.iht.com/articles/2006/08/02/news/india.php,accessed on November 20, 2006.

21. Joshi R and Kapoor S (2004), BusinessEnvironment, Kalyani Publishers,Ludhiana.

22. Krishna C G (1992), Corporate SocialResponsibility in India, MittalPublications, New Delhi.

23. Kumar M (1996), "Corporate SocialReporting in India: A ComparativeStudy of Public and Private SectorCompanies", Ph. D. Dissertation,GND University, Amritsar.

24. Luce R A, Barber A E and HillmanA J (2001), "Good Deeds andMisdeeds: A Medicated Model of theEffect of Corporate SocialPerformance on Organizational

Volumen 75 No.2


Attractiveness", Business & Society,

Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 397-415.

25. McWilliams A and Siegel D (2001),"Corporate Social Responsibility:A Theory of Firm Perspective",Academy of Management Review,Vol.26,No.l, pp. 117-127.

26. Milne M J and Adler R W (1999),"Exploring the reliability of Social andEnvironmental Disclosures ContentAnalysis", Accounting, Auditing andAccountability Journal, Vol. 12, No. 2,pp. 237-256.

27. Mohr LA and Webb DJ (2005), "TheEffects of Corporate SocialResponsibility and Price on ConsumerResponses, Journal of ConsumerAffairs, Vol. 39, No. 1, pp. 121-147.

28. Parsa S, Kouhy R and Tzavas C (2007),"Governance and Social InformationDisclosure-Evidence from the UK",Int. J. Business Covemance and Ethics,Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 205-222.

29. Preston L E and O'Bannon D P- (1997), "The Corporate Social-

Financial Performance Relationship:A Typology and Analysis", Business &Society, Vol. 36, No. 4, pp. 419-429.

30. Rashid Z A and Ibrahim S (2002),"Executive and ManagementAttitudes towards Corporate SocialResponsibility in Malaysia", CorporateGovernance, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 10-16.

31. Russo M V and Fouts PA (1997), "AResource-Based Perspective onCorporate EnvironmentalPerformance and Profitability",

Academy of Management Journal,

Vol. 40, No. 3, pp. 534-559.

32. Ruf B M, Muralidhar K, Brown R M,et al (2001), "An EmpiricalInvestigation of the Relationshipbetween Change in Corporate SocialPerformance and FinancialPerformance: A Stakeholder TheoryPerspective", Joumai of Business Ethics,Vol.32,No. 2, pp. 143-156.

33. Sarkar C R (2005), Corporate SocialResponsibility of Business Enterprises,New Century Publications, NewDelhi.

34. Smith N C (2003), "Corporate SocialResponsibility: Whether or How?",California Management Review,Vol. 45, No. 4, pp. 52-76.

35. Steiner G A (1972), "Social Policiesfor Business", California ManagementReview, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 17-24.

36. Sturdivant F D and Ginter J L (1977),"Corporate Social Responsiveness:Management Attitudes andEconomic Performance", CaliforniaManagement Review, Vol. 19, No. 3,pp. 30-39.

37. Teoh, Hai-Yap and Gregory Thong TS (1986), "Another Look at CorporateSocial Responsibility and Reporting:An Empirical Study in a DevelopingCountry", Malaysian ManagementReview, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 36-51.

38. Turban D Band Greening DE (1996),"Corporate Social Performance andOrganisational Attractiveness toProspective Employees", Academy of

Volumen 76 No. 2


Management Joumai, Vol. 40, No. 3,

pp.658-672.

39. Tsoutsoura M (2004), "GorporateSocial Responsibility and EinancialPerformance", available atwww.haas.berkeley.edu, accessed onOctober 15, 2004.

40. Unerman J (2000), "MethodologicalIssues—Reflections on Qualification inGorporate Social Reporting GontentAnalysis", Accounting, Auditing &Accountability Joumai, Vol. 13. No. 5,pp. 667-681.

41. WaddockSAandGravesSB(1997),"The Gorporate Social Performance-Financial Performance Link", StrategicManagement Joumai, Vol. 18, No. 4,pp. 303-319.

WEBSITES

1. http://pressbulletinboard.nokia.com

2. http://rural.nic.in/il.htm

3. http://wcd.nic.in/empwomen.htm

4. www.hul.co.in/sustainability/Brands/Eco -innovation. aspx

5. www.iepf.gov.in./InvestorGrievances_BSE.asp

6. www.IndianNGOs.com

7. www.indiaprline.com

8. www.rediff.com/business/2000/jun/14sebi.htm

9. www.vaki lno l .com/bareac ts /companiesact/s207.htm

Volume 17 77 No. 2


APPENDIX

Industry-Wise List of Companies and Their WebsitesIndustry/Company

Automobile

Asbok Leyland Ltd.


Bajaj Auto Ltd.

Bajaj Tempo Ltd.


Mabarasbtra Scooters Ltd.

Mabindra &. Mabindra Ltd.

Swaraj Mazda Ltd.


Tata Motors Ltd.

Cement



Dalmia Cement (Bbarat) Ltd.


Cujarat Sidbee Cement Ltd.

India Cements Ltd.

Madras Cements Ltd.

OCL India Ltd.

Saurasbtra Cement Ltd.

FertilizersCbambal Fertilizers & Cbeniicals Ltd.

Dbaramsi Morarji Cbemical Company Ltd.

Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Company Ltd.

Gujarat State Fertilizers & Cbemicals Ltd.

Rasbtriya Cbemicals & Fertilizers Ltd.

Tata Cbemicals Ltd.


PowerCESC Ltd.

Gujarat Industries Power Company Ltd.

Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd.




Websites

www. asbokleyland .com

www.atlascyclesonepat.com

www.bajajauto.com

www.tempoindia.com

www.berobonda.com

www.bajajauto.co.in

www.mabindraworld.com

www.swarajenterprise.com

www.tvsmotor.in

www.tatamotors.com

www.acclimited.com

www.birlacorporation.com

www.dalmiacement.com

www.gujaratambuja.com

www.mebtagroup.com/gs cement.btm

www.indiacements.co.in

www.madrascements.com

www.oclindialtd.in

www.mebtagroup.com/scement.btm

www.zuari-cbambal.com

www.dmcc.com

www.gnvfc.net

www.gsfclimited.com

www.rcfltd.com

www.tatacbemicals.com

www.zuari-cbambal.com

www.cescltd.com

www.gipcl.com

www.nlcindia.co.in

www.rel.co.in

www.tatapower.com

www.webelsolar.com

Volumen 78 Na 2


APPENDIX (CONT)

Industry/Company

Iron and Steel



Kirloskar Ferrous Industries Ltd.

Monnet Ispat Ltd.



Tata Steel Ltd.

Tata Metaliks Ltd.


Paints and Varnishes




ICI India Ltd.

Paper


Pudumjee Pulp & Paper Mills Ltd.

Rainbow Papers Ltd.

Seshasayee Paper & Boards Ltd.



Drugs and Pharmaceuticals

Alembic Ltd.

Aurobindo Pharma Ltd.

Aventis Pharma Ltd.

Cipla Ltd.


Glaxosmithkline Pharmaceuticals Ltd.


Lupin Ltd.

Nicholas Piramal India Ltd.

Novartis India Ltd.

Orchid Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals Ltd.

Pfizer Ltd.


Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd.

Websites

www.ispatind.com

www.jvsl.com

www. kirloskar.com

www.monnetgroup.com

http://sathavahana.com

www.sail.co.in

www.tatasteel.com

www.tatametaliks.com

www.tatasponge.com

www.asianpaints.com

www.bergerpaints.com

www.nerolac.com

www.iciindia.com

www.andhrapaper.com

www.pudumjee.com

www.rainbowpapers.com

www.spbltd.com

www.sirpurpaper.com

www.westcoastpaper.com

www.alembic-india.com

www.aurobindo.com

www.aventispharmaindia.com

www.cipla.com

www.drreddys.com

www.gsk.com

www.ipcalabs.com

www.lupinworld.com

www.nicholaspiramal.com

www.novartis.com

www.orchidpharma.com

www.pfizer.com

www.ranbaxy.com

www.sunpharma.com

Volume 17 79 N.[0.2


APPENDIX (CONT)

Indus try/c ompany


Sugar

Bannari Amman Sugars Ltd.





Tea and Coffee

Apeejay Tea Ltd.

Assam Company Ltd.



Tata Tea Ltd.

Software

CMC Ltd.



NIIT Ltd.


Wipro Ltd.

Textile

Century Enka Ltd.



Indo Rama Synthetics (India) Ltd.

Krishna Lifestyle Technologies Ltd.

Raymond Ltd.

Vardhman Textiles Ltd.

Industrial Machinery


Disa India Ltd.

Flat Products Equipments (India) Ltd.


Websites

www.torrentpham-ia.com

www.bannari.com

www.dhampur.com

' www.eidparry.com

www.simbhaolisugars.com

www.ugarsugar.com

www.apeejaytea.coni

www.assamco.com

www.goodricke.com

www.harrisonmalayalam.com

www.tatatea.com

www.cmcltd.com

www.hexaware.com

www. info sy s .com

www.niit.com

www.satyani.coni

www.wipro.com

www.centuryenka.com

www.easternsilk.com

www.krishnagroup.com

www.indoramaindia.com

www.krishnagroup.com

www.raymondindia.coni

www.vardhman.com

www. alfalaval .com

www.disagroup.com

www.flatproducts.com

www.flexenggltd.coni

Volume 17 80 No.2

Copyright of South Asian Journal of Management is the property of South Asian Journal of Management and its

content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's

express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

Csr Initiative

Documents

business management

business needs

escape irom society

business davis andundergone

waythe impact of business

csr measurement

csr arena

low csr performers