




































Asian Finance & Banking Review; Vol. 2, No. 1; 2018 

ISSN 2576-1161   E-ISSN 2576-1188 

Published by Centre for Research on Islamic Banking & Finance and Business 

 

 

7 

 

Analytical Review of Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate 

Financial Performance of Some Firms from Within and Outside 

Nigeria 
 

Abdulrahman, S
1 

 

1
Department of Accounting, Faculty of Social and Management Sciences, Bauchi State University, Nigeria. 

Correspondence: Department of Accounting, Faculty of Social and Management Sciences, Bauchi State University, 

Gadau, Bauchi State, Nigeria., E-mail: abdulningi17@gmail.com. Tel: +2347035597220. 

 

 

 

Received:  January 17, 2018                  Accepted: January 20, 2018                   Online Published: January 25, 2018   

 

 

Abstract 

This study analyzed the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) of firms with their Corporate Financial Performance 

(CFP) based on contextual content analysis. The study forge ahead to compare the outcomes of various conceptual 

and empirical studies that deals with CSR and CFP from within and outside the domicile of Nigeria. The findings 

from the previous studies showed conflicting results or outputs (i.e. many positive outcomes, some negative results 

while very few showed neutral relationship between CSR and CFP of firms). Therefore, this study is of the opinion 

that there is a positive cordiality between CSR and CFP because more than 50% of the authorities/scholars in the 

field proved it conceptually and empirically that there is positive relationship among the two concepts (i.e. CSR and 

CFP). As such, the issue of CSR should be given a more consideration by all the parties to it (i.e. Employees, 

Employers, Government, Researchers, Management and the Public at large). Since, it yields positive impact to the 

CFP of Firms as such a dedicated agency or commission should be established to be monitoring the Firms toward 

real implementation of CSR. 

 

Keywords: Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), Corporate Financial Performance (CFP), Content Analysis, 

Stakeholders Theory, Shareholders Theory, Judgmental Sampling. 

 

1. Introduction 

The field of tension between Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Corporate Financial Performance (CFP) is 

addressed in studying the relationship between the two concepts because firms are mostly grapping on strategic, 

tactical and operational levels to identify ways to meet society’s demands. This is in combination of achieving 

company performance targets in an economic climate under pressure. The question whether businessmen have social 

responsibilities to fulfil is an ethical question and the answer to an ethical question, is a matter of opinion and 

individual perception. According to Friedman (1970) “there is one and only one responsibility of business to use its 

resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profit so long as it stays within the rule of the game; which 

to say engage in open and free competition without deception or fraud”. 

CSR is one of the most controversial areas of debate that continues to be of great concern to corporations, 

researchers, analysts, communities, investors and even the entire public. This is due to its complexity vis-à-vis 

worldwide acceptable connotation of the term, yardstick of measuring it and even the yardstick of measuring the 

financial performance of the corporations is contradicting (Abdulrahman, 2014).  

The Questions are: Is there any positive relationship between CSR and CFP among the Firms?, Is there any negative 

relationship between CSR and CFP among the Firms?, Is there any neutral relationship between CSR and CFP 

among the Firms?  The study intends to restrict itself within the analytical review of the previous studies within the 

field of CSR and CFP to achieve the specific and general objectives of the study. 

It is expected that the benefits that will be derived from this study cannot be overemphasis. Many beneficiaries are 

expected to benefit from this research, to mention among the few are the researchers, the consultants, the regulatory 

authorities, the management and the entire public at large.   

 



 
 

www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/asfbr              Asian Finance & Banking Review        Vol. 2, No. 1; 2018 

8 
 

 

2. Review of Related Literatures 

In retrospect, the development of the definition of the CSR concept, and related concepts, has centred on three 

themes: corporate relations in the economic, societal and environmental dimension, and sustainability (Wissink, 

2012).That is why, in practice or even in theory and literature there is no any contextual and a worldwide acceptable 

definition of the key term CSR, it depends upon with the way and manner you view it, because even among the 

classical, neoclassical and modern scholars, they did not reach any consensus or unanimous concord as regards to 

the conceptual connotation or denotation of the term. But this will never demoralize the effort of researcher in 

looking at the contradicting views of the scholars, as it will be mentioned in the next paragraphs. 

The term CSR is often used interchangeably with other terms, as such it should not be a surprising when various 

authors consider other term instead of CSR such as corporate conscience, good corporate citizenship, corporate 

citizenship, business responsibility, business citizenship, social performance, sustainable responsible business, 

community relations, responsible business and is also linked to the concept of triple P (i.e. People, Planet, Profit or 

"the three pillars”) (Tilt, 2009) or triple bottom line reporting (TBL or 3BL), which is use as a framework for 

measuring an organisation’s performance against economic, social and environmental parameters (Shah, 2007). 

From the point viewed of Frooman (1997) CSR is just an action by a firm, that it chooses to take, that substantially 

affects an identifiable social stakeholder’s welfare. According to Kurtz (2006), CSR involves marketing 

philosophies, policies, procedures and actions whose primary objective is the enhancement of the society. Jones and 

George (2003) term the concept of CSR as managers’ duty or obligation to make decisions that nurture, protect, 

enhance and promote the welfare as well as the well-being of stakeholders and society as a whole. 

Ruggie (2002) looked at CSR as a strategy for demonstrating good faith, social legitimacy, and a commitment that 

goes beyond the financial bottom line. But Holme and Watts (2002) opined CSR as capacity building for sustainable 

livelihoods. In respect of cultural differences and look for business opportunities in building the skills of their 

employees, government and the community at large. While Carroll and Bocholt, (2003) viewed CSR as economic, 

legal, ethical, and discretionary expectations that society has of organizations at a given point in time. Baker (2012) 

holds that CSR is all about how companies manage the business processes to produce an overall positive impact on 

society. While Carroll, (1979) looked at CSR as the economic, legal, ethical and discretionary demands that society 

places on business. In another viewed, CSR is defined as a concept that requires business to contribute to the 

immediate community where they operate, in a view to ensuring the growth and development of that community in 

particular, and the economy as a whole (Dandago & Muhammad, 2011). 

The issue of CSR is of paramount importance that needs serious consideration both from within and from outside. 

The empirical study results on the CSR and CFP have never been in agreement, because so many researchers found 

different results. Some studies determined negative relationship, positive relationship, while others determined no 

relation at all between the two terms. There are so many empirical studies of CSR and financial performance like in 

the case of Griffin and Mahon (1997) summarized their findings of numerous articles they reviewed and came to the 

conclusion that no definitive consensus exists on the empirical CSP and CFP. Other empirical evidence suggests 

conflicting results about the direction of CSP and CFP linkage (i.e. Alexander and Buchholz, 1978; Aupperle, 

Carroll and Hatfield, 1985; Ullman, 1985). However, additional studies have found a positive relationship (i.e.; 

Tsoutsoura, 2004, Uwalomwa & Egbide 2012, Gunu 2008; Uadiale & Fagbemi 2011; David 2012; Bowman, 1975;, 

Preston, 1997; Anderson and Frankle, 1980). Waddock and Graves (1997) found a positive association between CSP 

and return on asset, return on equity, and return on sales of firms, and tested such association to be bidirectional. 

This is inconsistent to findings from other prior studies which have identified a negative relationship (i.e., Aupperle, 

Carroll & Hatfield 1985; Friedman 1970; Adeboye & Olawale 2012; Igbal Ahmad & Nadeem 2012; Marcia, 

Otgontsetseg & Hassan 2013; Freedman and Jaggi, 1986). Then finally, those that found neutral relationship 

(MacWilliams & Siegel 2000; Adeboye, and Oluwatoyosi & Elizabeth 2012;), are of the view that CSR have neutral 

relationship with financial performance of corporations. In view of these conflicting results in trying to find the 

existence of relationship between the CSR and financial performance we can rightly say that it is not an easy task to 

discover the linkage between the two key terms (Ullmann 1985). Hence the relationship is unclear.   Other studies 

on CSR and CFP are tabulated below for a better expatiation:  



 
 

www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/asfbr              Asian Finance & Banking Review        Vol. 2, No. 1; 2018 

9 
 

Table 1: Empirical Studies from Within and Outside Nigeria 

S/No Author Name (S) 

And Year 

Scope 

of 

Study 

Independent 

Variable(S) 

Dependent 

Variable 

Outcomes  

Or Results 

Country Nature of Data 

1 Uadiale 

& 

Fagbemi(2011) 

2007 

 

 

Community 

Performance, 

Environmental 

Management System 

Return on Assets 

(ROA) & Return on 

Equity 

(ROE) 

Positive and 

significant 

relationship 

Nigeria Cross Sectional 

Data 

2 Gunu (2008) 2002-2006 CSR Disclosed in 

Shareholders Report 

Profit after Tax 

(PAT), Divident, 

Total Assets (TA), 

and Gross earnings 

Positive and 

Significant 

relationship 

Nigeria Time Series Data 

3 Bolanle, 

Olanrewaju & 

Muyideen (2012) 

 

 

2001- 

2010 

CSR Disclosed in 

Shareholders Report 

Profit after Tax 

(PAT) 

Positive 

Relationship 

Nigeria Time Series 

4 Bello (2012) 2002- 

2006 

Donations (DN), 

Environmental 

Pollution & 

Prevention (EPP), 

Health & Safety of 

Employee and 

Employment of 

Disable Person (HS) 

ROA Negative and No 

significant  

Relationship 

Nigeria Time Series of 

individual 

observations of 

companies 

5 Oba (2009) 2001- 

2006 

Community Social 

Responsibility, 

Human Resource 

Management, 

Charitable 

Contribution and Firm 

size 

Market Value 

measured by 

Tobin’s Equity Q 

Significant 

aggregate impact 

Nigeria Penal Data 

6 Uwuigbe & 

Egbide (2012) 

2008 Return on Total 

Assets (ROTA), Debt 

to Equity (Nature of 

the Industry) & Size 

of Audit firm 

CSR Disclosure 

Index 

Positive 

Relationship 

Nigeria Cross Sectional 

Data 

7 Iqbal, Ahmad, 

Basheer & 

Nadeem 

(2012) 

2010-2011 Corporate Social 

Performance (CSP) 

index 

ROA, ROE, D/E, & 

Market Value of 

Share 

Negative 

Relationship 

Pakistan  Panel Data 

8 David (2012) 2011 CSR Disclosure Index Societal Progress Significant 

relationship 

Nigeria  Cross Sectional 

Data 

9 Ojo (2007) 2002-2006 CSR Disclosed in 

Shareholders Report  

Turnover of Gross 

Earnings 

Positive 

Relationship 

Nigeria Panel Data 

10 Olayinka and 

Fagbemi (2012) 

2012 CSR Disclosed in 

Shareholders Report  

ROE & ROA positive and 

significant 

relationship 

Nigeria Cross Sectional 

Data 

11 Tsoutsoura (2004) 1996-2000 KLD Scores and 

Domini 400 Social 

Index 

ROA, ROE & ROS positively and 

statistically 

significant 

California Panel Data 

12 Meijer & Schuyt 

(2005) 

2005 CSR Consumer 

Motivation 

Negative 

Relationship 

Dutch Cross Sectional 

Data  

13 Brine, Brown & 

Hackett (2006) 

2005 Dummy Variable ROA, ROS & ROE No significant 

Relationship  

Australia Cross Sectional  

14 Saleh et al, (2007)    Positive 

Relationship  

  

15 Fiori et al. (2007) 2002-2007 CSR Disclosed in 

Shareholders Report  

Stock Price Positive 

Relationship  

Italian Panel Data 



 
 

www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/asfbr              Asian Finance & Banking Review        Vol. 2, No. 1; 2018 

10 
 

16 Asongu (2007)   Questionnaire  Questionnaire  Positive 

Relationship 

Africa Questionnaire 

17  Ali et al, (2010) 2010 Questionnaire Questionnaire No significant 

Relationship 

Pakistan Questionnaire 

18 Servaes and 

Tamayo (2012) 

2010 CSR Disclosed in 

Shareholders Report 

advertising 

expenditures 

Positive 

Relationship 

Nigeria Cross Sectional 

Data 

19 Wissink (2012)  Dow Jones 

Sustainability Index 

(DJSI) 

Return on Equity 

(ROE), Return on 

Assets (ROA) and 

Return on Sales 

(ROS)  

Positive 

Relationship 

The world’s 

2500 largest 

companies 

Questionnaire 

20 Vitezić (2011) 1993 -2010 Social Responsibility 

Development 

Corporate 

Efficiency 

Positive 

Relationship 

Croatian 

enterprises 

Panel Data 

21 Anescu (2009) 1991- 2007 KLD Stock Return Positive  

Relationship 

US Panel Data  

22 Purnomo and 

Widianingsih 

(2012) 

2006-2010 PROPER rating with 

CSR Disclosure as a 

moderating variable 

Net Profit  Margin Positive  

Relationship 

Indonesia Panel Data 

23 Yang, Lin and 

Chang (2010) 

 1.CSP (Size & R&D 

as controlled Variable 

2.CFP (Size & R&D 

as controlled Variable  

1.CFP  

 

 

 

2.CSP 

Mixed 

Relationship 

Taiwan Panel Data 

24 El Ghoul, 

Guedhami, Kwok 

and Mishra 

(2012) 

 Employee Relations, 

Environmental 

Policies, and Product 

Strategies  

Cost of Equity  Positive 

Relationship 

U.S  

25 Afonso et al 

(2012)  

2005 - 

2009  

CSR Index  Return on Equity 

(ROE), Return on 

Assets (ROA) and 

Return on Sales 

(ROS)  

Mixed 

Relationship  

Portuguese  Panel Data  

26 Setiawan and 

Janet (2012)  

2007-2010  corporate social 

responsibility  

Financial 

Performance  

Positive 

Relationship  

Indonesia  Interviewing 

27 Lungu, Chiraţa 

and Dascălu 

(2011)  

Content 

Analysis 

Corporate Social 

Responsibility  

Size characteristics 

measured by Assets 

and Revenues 

Negative 

Relationship  

  

28 Keffas, and 

Olulu-Briggs 

(2011)  

  thirty-eight (38) 

financial and 

economic ratios 

based on variables 

such as Asset 

quality, Capital, 

Operations and 

Liquidity  

Positive 

Relationship  

Japan, US and 

UK  

 

29 McWilliams and 

Siegel (2001)  

1991-1996  Industry, and 

Expenditure for 

Research and 

Development  

Dummy variable;   

Domini 400 Social 

Index (DSI 400)  

Insignificant U.S Panel 

30 Simpson and 

Kohers (2002) 

 Community  

Reinvestment Act 

(CRA) ratings  

Financial 

Performance 

   

31 Mahoney and 

Roberts (2007)  

Four Years Corporate Social 

Responsibility   

Financial 

Performance  

Mixed 

Relationship 

Canada  Panel Data 

32 Subroto (2002)   CSR  Financial 

Performance  

Positive 

Relationship  

Indonesia  Cross-Sectional 

Data 

33 Abdulrahman 

(2014a) 

2006-2011 ER, CP, EMS ROE Positive 

Relationship 

Nigeria Panel Data 

34 Abdulrahman 

(2013) 

2006-2010 CSR Profit after Tax 

(PAT) 

Weak Positive 

Relationship 

Nigeria Panel Data 

 



 
 

www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/asfbr              Asian Finance & Banking Review        Vol. 2, No. 1; 2018 

11 
 

 

Table 2: Other Empirical Studies  

Sources: Researcher Literature Reviewed 

 

Different theoretical frameworks have been brought to bear on the concept of CSR, depending on one’s perspective; 

Two major prominent schools of thought among them are restrictive and expansionists schools of thought.                                                                      

Agency Theory: this theory is talking about firm as a link between the agents and their principals because of the 

contractual relationship, the agents (i.e. Managers) can act on behalf of the principals (i.e. Owners). The whole 

essence of agency theory is attempting to deal with two specific problems; if the goals of the principal and agent are 

in conflict, and to reconcile the principal and agent different tolerances for risk. 

Legitimacy Theory: This theory posits that business organizations must consider the rights of the community at 

large, not merely those of investors. If the corporations do not appear to operate within the bounds of the behavior 

considered appropriate by the community, then the community will act to remove the organization's right to 

continue its operations. When an actual and potential disparity exist between the business and social value systems, 

this will lead to threats to organizational legitimacy in form of legal, economic, and other sanctions. The theory also 

assumes that a company not acting legitimately would be denied continued existence by the society and the society 

has the power over institutions to force them to dissolve (Tijjani, 2011).  

Stockholders Theory 

Stockholders or shareholders theory addresses only the interest of four parties that constitute investors, employees, 

suppliers and customers. Stockholder management will not be able to sustain itself in a relatively free society 

because, if agents feel that an activity does not serve their interests they will either abandon that activity or change 

the law in order to constrain that activity and such an activity will not be able to sustain itself unless the interests of 

all participants are served by the activity.  

Political Economy Theory 

According to Gray et al (1996, p. 47) look at this theory as the social, political and economic framework within 

which human life takes place, etc political economy, which is economic analysis from political and historical 

perspectives.  The theory embraced that society, politics and economies are inseparable, and economic issues cannot 

meaningfully be investigated in the absence of considerations about the political, social and institutional framework 

in which the economic activity takes place. Political economy deals with the distributive consequences of economic 

actions. It asks who gains and who loses from economic activity and is the resultant distribution fair or just, which 

are central ethical issues (Robotham 2005). 

Stakeholders’ Theory 
The stakeholder concept was first used in 1963 internal memorandum at the Stanford Research Institute. They 

defined stakeholders as "those groups without whose support the organization would cease to exist." The theory was 

later developed and championed by R. Edward Freeman (1980s). Since then it has gained wide acceptance in 

business practice and in theorizing related to strategic management, corporate governance, business purpose and 

corporate social responsibility (CSR). Hawke (2009), posit that stakeholder theory is true if and only if stockholder 

theory is true and the only way that a business manager can maximally serve the interests of shareholders is by 

serving the interests of all stakeholders. 

Theoretical Framework 
The theoretical framework underpinning this study is stakeholder’s theory because is a theory of organizational 

management and business ethics that addresses morals and values in managing an organization. Stakeholder’s theory 

35 Abdulrahman 

(2014b) 

2006-2011 CSR Total Assets (TA) Strong Positive 

Relationship 

Nigeria Panel Data 

36 Abdulrahman  

(2014c) 

2006-2011 ER, EMS Total Assets (TA) Strong Positive 

Relationship 

Nigeria Panel Data 

S/No Author Name (S) Year Measure of CSR Measure of  

Firm Performance 

Outcomes Or Results 

1-  Cochran & Wood 1984 Moskowitz reputational 

index 

Abnormal return Positive  Relationship 

2-  Aupperle, Carrol, & Hatfield 1985 Carroll’s (1979) CSR 

construct 

ROA No relationship 

3-  Fombrun & 

Shanley 

1990 Charitable contributions, 

Fortune index 

ROIC, Market-to-book ratio Mixed Relationship 

4-  McWilliams & Siegel 2000 KLD index ROA Mixed Relationship 

5-  Orlitzky, Schmidt, & Rynes 2003 KLD index P/E ratio, ROE, ROA Mixed Relationship 



 
 

www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/asfbr              Asian Finance & Banking Review        Vol. 2, No. 1; 2018 

12 
 

attempts to address the principle of whom or what really counts. It is also an instrumental theory of the corporation 

that integrates both the resource based view as well as the market based view and adding socio-political level.  

The following diagrams show how the stakeholders’ theory correlates various corporate bodies into a single or unit 

corporate body; because stakeholder is that which can affect or be affected by the actions of the business as a whole. 

The stakeholders’ theory has been found to have an allure or influence in the real academic literature. 

The Structure of Stakeholders Theory Umbrella 

 
                   

Source: Researcher Observation 

Circular Flow of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) 

 
 

Source: Researcher Observation 

From the above aforementioned two diagrams we can see the link between the communities and the corporate 

bodies, which implies a causal relationship in form of interwoven relationship even though the communities can 

survive without the companies but the companies cannot survive without the communities. Bolanle et al  (2012) 

from their own perception they viewed CSR as a comprehensive set of policies, practices, and programs that are 

integrated into business operations, supply chains and decision making processes throughout the company and 

usually include issues related to business ethics, community investment, environmental concerns, governance, 

human rights, the marketplace as well as the workplace. By looking at the previous circular flow of CSR and the 

• Local Communities• Government/NGO

• Unions/Employees• Consumers/S
hareholders

Marketplace Workplace

CommunityEnvironment

Unions/Emplyees

Local  
Communities

Impact On 
Society

Government/NGO

Consumers/S
hareholders



 
 

www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/asfbr              Asian Finance & Banking Review        Vol. 2, No. 1; 2018 

13 
 

umbrella of stakeholders’ theory respectively, we can easily deduced from the definition of the pioneers that their 

point of viewed explained the diagrams. 

3. Methodology  

For the purpose of this study, judgemental sampling method was been adopted by using simple percentage and 

Application of Excel to analyse the data. The formula of simple percentage is as follows: 
𝐹

𝑁
 𝑋

100%

1
 

Where 

Table 3: Key Terms 

Description Meaning 

% Percentage 

F Frequency 

N Total Number 

100 Constant 

Source: Researcher Reviewed  

 

4.Findings and Discussions 

The study reviewed so many empirical researches and it is based on the study the researcher discovered the 

following findings: 

Table 4: Synopses of the Study 

S/N Description Total Observed Outcome Percentage 

1 Positive Relationship 38 56.72% 

2 Negative Relationship 11 16.42% 

3 Neutral Relationship 6 8.96% 

4 No Relationship 3 4.48% 

5 Mixed Relationship 9 13.42%` 

6 Total 67 100% 

Source: Reviewed Literature 

 

From the above table 4, it can be deduced that different researchers came up with different findings. For instance out 

of the 67 empirical researches reviewed under CSR and CFP, 38 researchers found positive relationship between 

CSR and CFP which constituted 56%. Another 11 researchers which is 16.42% discovered a negative relationship 

between CSR and CFP while 6 out of 67 researchers found a neutral relationship between CSR and CFP which 

constituted 8.96%. Moreover, 3 researchers found no relation between CSR and CFP which has 4.48%. Some 

researchers discovered mixed results which partake 13.42% (i.e. 9 Empirical Researches). 

 

1. Positive Relationship : 
38

67
 𝑋

100%

1
 = 56.72% 

 

2. Negative Relationship : 
11

67
 𝑋

100%

1
 = 16.42% 

 

3. Neutral Relationship : 
6

67
 𝑋

100%

1
 = 8.96%  

 

4. No Relationship : 
3

67
 𝑋

100%

1
  = 4.48% 

 

5. Mixed Relationship : 
9

67
 𝑋

100%

1
 = 13.42% 

 



 
 

www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/asfbr              Asian Finance & Banking Review        Vol. 2, No. 1; 2018 

14 
 

 
Source: Analysed Output from Excel, 2017. 

As demonstrated from the bar-chart above. It can be noticed from the right hand side to the left hand side that 67 

constitute of the entire total which is indicated within the range of 0% to 70% and 9 researchers’ findings fall within 

0% to 10% while 3 researchers’ findings fall within 0% to 5%. Moreover, 6 researchers findings fall within 0% to 

9% and 11 researchers findings is within the range of 0% to 20% and then finally 38 researchers findings is within 

the range of 0% to 40%. 

 
Source: Analysed Output from Excel, 2017. 

 

From the above pie chart it can be observed that different researchers came up with different findings. For instance 

out of the 67 empirical researches reviewed under CSR and CFP, 38 researchers found positive relationship between 

CSR and CFP which constituted 57% approximately to zero decimal place. Another 11 researchers which is 16% 

approximately to zero decimal place discovered a negative relationship between CSR and CFP while 6 out of 67 

researchers found a neutral relationship between CSR and CFP which constituted 9% approximately to zero decimal 

place. Moreover, 3 researchers found no relation between CSR and CFP which has 5% approximately to zero 

decimal place. Some researchers discovered mixed results which partake 13% approximately to zero decimal place 

(i.e. 9 Empirical Researches). 

4.Conclusion and Recommendations  

This study was conducted to analyse the cordiality between CSR and CFP among the empirical studies carried out 

from within and outside Nigeria. The result of the study shows that majority of the studies carried out found positive 

relationship among the two concepts. Some studies conducted such as Pava and Krausz (1996) identified and 

reviewed 21 empirical studies in his study, while Margolis and Walsh (2003) reported that 122 published studies 

empirically examined the relationship between CSR and CFP during the period 1971 – 2001. Furthermore, Orlitzky, 

Schmidt, and Rynes (2003) conducted a meta-analysis of 52 studies, which revealed that most results of prior studies 

found that CSR had a positive impact on financial performance which is in line with the finding of this study. 

Therefore, it can be logically jump to conclusion that there is strong positive relationship between CSR and CFP. As 

such regulatory authorities should come to play a vital role towards ensuring firms compliance with CSR. 

References  

Abdulrahman, S. (2013) The influence of corporate social responsibility on profit after tax of  some selected 

deposit money banks in Nigeria. Educ. Res.  4(10):722-732 

Descripti
on

Positive 
Relation

ship

Negative 
Relation

ship

Neutral 
Relation

ship

No 
Relation

ship

Mixed 
Relation

ship
Total

0 38 11 6 3 9 67

0 38 11 6 3 9

67

-20
0

20
40
60
80

100

A
X

IS
 T

IT
LE

Linear ()

Positive 
Relationship

57%
Negative 

Relationship
16%

Neutral 
Relationship

9%

No 
Relationship

5%

Mixed 
Relationship

13%

The Pie Chart



 
 

www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/asfbr              Asian Finance & Banking Review        Vol. 2, No. 1; 2018 

15 
 

Abdulrahman, S. (2014a) The Influence of Corporate Social Responsibility on Total Assets of  Quoted 

Conglomerates in Nigeria. Journal of Business Administration and Management Sciences Research Vol. 3 

No 1, Pp. 012-021, January, 2014 (ISSN: 2315-8727),  http://www.apexjournal.org Accepted 21- 

January-2014 

Abdulrahman, S. (2014b) Relationship Between Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Total  Assets of 

Quoted Conglomerates In Nigeria. Journal of Educational Policy and  Entrepreneurial Research (JEPER) 

www.iiste.org Vol.1, N0.2, October 2014 Pp 69-79 

Abdulrahman, S. (2014c) Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Financial Performance (FP)  of Quoted 

Conglomerate Companies in Nigeria. Published M. Sc. Thesis submitted to  Accounting Department, 

Institute of Administration, Postgraduate School, Ahmadu Bello  University (A B U Zaria), Kaduna 

State, Nigeria. www.kubanni.abu.edu.ng 

Adebayo, O., Oluwatoyosi, O.T. & Elizabeth, O.M. (2012), “Corporate Social Responsibility  Reporting and 

Financial Performance of Money Deposit banks in Nigeria Prime Journal  of Business 

Administration and Management (BAM) ISSN: 2251-1261. Vol. 2(11), Pp.  758-769, November 13th, 

2012.  www.primejournal.org/ BAM © Prime Journals 

Afonso, S. C., Fernandes, P. O., & Monte, A. P. (2012) CSR of top Portuguese Companies:  Relation 

between Social Performance and Economic Performance World Academy of  Science, Engineering and 

Technology 66 2012  

Alexander, G. J., & R. A. Buchholz (1978), “Corporate Social Responsibility and Stock Market  

 Performance”; Academy of Management Journal, 21(3): 479-486. 

Ali, I. Rehman, K.U., Yilmaz, A.K., Nazir, S.  and Ali, J. F.  (2010). “Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility 

on Consumer Retention in Cellular industry of Pakistan’, African Journal  of Business 

Management”, vol. 4(4), pp. 475-485 

Anderson, J.C. and Frankle, A.W. (1980), Voluntary social reporting: An iso-beta portfolio 

 analysis, Accounting review Vol. 20 

Anescu, C. M. (2009), Responsible Investment: Integration, Engagement, Transparency Do  investors 

perceive Corporate Social Responsibility as a risk factor? Evidence from an  asset  pricing analysis 

oikos PRI Young Scholar Academy 2009: Center for Finance,  School of Economics, Business 

Administration and Law, Gothenburg, Sweden. Email:   cristiana.manescu@c_.gu.se 

 Asongu, j. j. (2007): “the history of corporate social responsibility” journal of business and  public  policy 

volume 1, number 2 

Aupperle, K. E., A. B. Carroll, & J. D. Hatfield (1985), “An Empirical Examination of the  Relationship 

between Corporate Social Responsibility and Profitability” 

 Baker, M. (2004), First published Corporate social responsibility - What does it mean? 

Bowman, E. H., M. Haire. (1975), A strategic posture toward corporate social responsibility 

Brine, M., Brown, R. and Hackett, G., 2007. “Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial  

 Performance in the Australian Context’, Economic Round-up”, pp. 47-58  

Carroll, A. and Bocholt, A. (2003); Business and Society: Ethics and Stakeholder Management, 5th edition. 

Cincinnati, Ohio South Western College Publishing Australia, 

Carroll, A.B. (1979), “A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance”  Academy of 

Management Review, 1979, Vol. 4, No. 4, p. 500 

Cochran, P. L., & R. A. Wood (1984) “Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial  Performance” 

 Academy of Management Journal, 27(1): 42-56.  

Dandago, K. I., & M.L Muhammad (2011), “Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in Kano: A  Banking 

Industry Perspective”. Journal Publication of the Department of Accounting,  Bayero University Kano, 

Edited by Kabiru Isah Dandago and Bashir Tijjani, Adamu Joji   Publishers, Kano Nigeria 

David, A.O. (2012), An Assessment of the impact of corporate social responsibility on Nigerian  Society: The 

Examples of Banking and Communication Industries. University Journal of  Marketing and Business 

Research Vol. 1(1) Pp. 017-043, May, 2012 www.universalresearchjournals.org/ujmbr 

El Ghoul, S. Guedhami, O.  Kwok C. C. Y. and Mishra, D. (2012)  Does Corporate Social  Responsibility 

Affect the Cost of Capital?  Journal of Economics and Sustainable  Development www.iiste.orgISSN 

2222-1700 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2855 (Online)Vol.3,  No.4, 2012 

Fiori, G. Donato and Izzo, M. F. (2007) Corporate Social Responsibility and Firms Performance an Analysis on 

Italian Listed companies, viewed 15 December 2011,  http://ssrn.com/Abstract=1032851 

Formbrum, C. J. & M. Shanley (1990): “What’s in a name? Reputation Building and Corporate  Strategy” 

Academy of Management Journal 33: 233-258 

http://www.apexjournal.org/
http://www.iiste.org/
http://www.kubanni.abu.edu.ng/
http://www.primejournal.org/
mailto:cristiana.manescu@c_.gu.se
http://www.universalresearchjournals.org/ujmbr
http://www.iiste.org/
http://ssrn.com/Abstract=1032851


 
 

www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/asfbr              Asian Finance & Banking Review        Vol. 2, No. 1; 2018 

16 
 

Freedman, M. and Jaggi, B. (1986), an analysis of the impact of corporate pollution Disclosures  included in 

Annual financial Statements on Investor’s Decisions. Advances in public Interest Accounting, Vol. 

1 Value based mgt. 

Friedman, M. (1970), “The Social Responsibility of Business Is To Increase Its Profits,” The  New York 

Times Magazine, Sept. 13, 1970, No. 33, pp. 122-26. See

 www.colorado.edu/studentgroups/libertarians/issues/friedmansoc- resp-business.html 

Frooman, J., (1997), “Socially Irresponsible and Illegal Behavior and Shareholders Wealth: A  meta-analysis of 

event studies”. Business and Society, 36, pp. 221-249 

Gray, R., Owen, D., & Adams, C. A. (1996), Accounting and Accountability: Changes and  Challenges in 

Corporate Social and Environmental Reporting, Prentice-Hall, London 

Griffin, J.J. and Manhon, J.F (1997), The Corporate Social Performance and Corporate Financial  performance 

Debate: Twenty-five years of Incomparable Research. Business and Society,  Vol. 36 

Gunu, U (2008): “The influence of corporate social responsibility on the performance of Banks”  A case study of 

Zenith Bank Plc. journal of Faculty of management sciences Usman  Danfodiyo University Sokoto 

ISSN 2141-1670 vol. 2 November, 2008      

Holme, L. and Watt, R. (2002), “Corporate Social Responsibility: Making Good Business  Sense”. World 

Business Council for Sustainable Development pp. 1-31     

http://books.google.com.ng/books 

Iqbal, N., N. Ahmad, N.A. Basheer, and M. Nadeem, (2012), Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on 

Financial Performance of Corporations: Evidence from Pakistan www.macrothink.org/ijld 

International Journal of Learning & Development ISSN: 2164- 4063 2012 Vol. 2, No. 6 

Jones, G.R. and George, J.M. (2003), Management, Third Edition, Boston; McGraw-Hill Irwin 

Keffas, G. And Olulu-Briggs, O. V. (2011) Corporate Social Responsibility: How Does It Affect  the Financial 

Performance Of Banks? Empirical Evidence From Us, Uk And Japan  Journal Of Management And 

Corporate Governance 2011 Cenresin Publications  www.cenresin.org 

Kurtz, B. (2006) Contemporary Marketing. 9th edition United Kingdom 

Lungu, C. I., Caraiani, C. And Dascălu, C. (2011) research on corporate social responsibility  reporting the 

Bucharest academy of economic studies, Romania 2011 

McWilliams A. & Siegel, D. (2000), “Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial  Performance: 

 Correlation or Misspecification?” Strategic Manage. J. 21(5): pp. 603-609 

McWilliams A. & Siegel, D. (2000), “Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial  Performance: 

 Correlation or Misspecification?” Strategic Manage. J. 21(5): pp. 603-609 

McWilliams, A. and D. Siegel, (2001), Corporate Social Responsibility: A Theory of the Firm 

Meijer, M. M. and Schuyt, T., (2005), “Corporate Social Performance as A Bottom Line for  Consumers’, 

Business and Society”, 44, 442-461.  

Oba, V. C (2009): “The impact of corporate social responsibility on market value of quoted  conglomerates 

in Nigeria, Unpublished M. Sc. Thesis Accounting Department. Ahmadu  Bello University Zaria 

Ojo, O. (2007), “Appraisal of the Practice of Social Responsibility by Business Organisations in  

 Nigeria” Covenant University, Ota, Nigeria 

Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F.L. and Rynes, S.L. (2003), Corporate Social and Financial Performance  a Meta-analysis” 

Organisation Studies 24 (3): pp 403-441. (Online) London, sage  Publication 

www.sagepublication.com 

Preston L. E. & O’Bannon D.P. (1997), “The Corporate Social-Financial Performance  Relationship”. Bus. Soc. 

36: pp. 419-429 

Purnomo, P. K.   & Widianingsih, L. P. (2012), the Influence of Environmental Performance  on Financial 

Performance with Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Disclosure as a  Moderating Variable:  

Evidence from Listed Companies in Indonesia Rev  Integr Bus.  Econ. Res. Vol 1(1) 57 Copyright 

2012 Society of Interdisciplinary Business Research  (www.sibresearch.org)  

Robotham, D. (2005). Political Economy. A Handbook of Economic Anthropology. J. G.  Carrier. Northampton, 

MA, Edward Elgar ISBN 1-84376-175-0 pp. 41–58 

Ruggie, W. G. (2002). “The theory and Practice of Learning Networks: Corporate Social  Responsibility and 

Global Compact” Journal of Corporate Citizenship Greenleaf  Publishing pp. 27-36 

Servaes, A. and Tamayo, A. (2012), The Impact of  Corporate Social Responsibility on Firm  Value: The Role 

of Customer Awareness London  Business School and London School  of Economics July 2012  

 Setiawan, E and Janet T J (2012) Corporate Social Responsibility, Financial Performance, and  Market 

Performance: Evidence from Indonesian Consumer Goods Industry  

http://www.colorado.edu/studentgroups/libertarians/issues/friedmansoc-%20resp-business.html
http://books.google.com.ng/books
http://www.macrothink.org/ijld
http://www.cenresin.org/
http://www.sagepublication.com/
http://www.sibresearch.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/1843761750


 
 

www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/asfbr              Asian Finance & Banking Review        Vol. 2, No. 1; 2018 

17 
 

Shah, A .(2007):“Corporatesocialresponsibility”http://www.globalissues.org/article/723/corporat e-social-

responsibility  

Tijjani, B. (2011),”Corporate Social Disclosure and Accounting Theories” Corporate  Governance  and 

Social Responsibility” Journal Publication of Department of  Accounting Bayero University Kano 

Nigeria 

Tilt, C. A. (2009): “Corporate responsibility, Accounting and Accountants” Flinders Business  School, Flinders 

University, Adelaide, Australia. 

Tsoutsoura, M. (2004): “Corporate social responsibility and financial performance” Applied  financial project 

Haas school of Business University of California, Barkley 

Uadiale, O. M. and Fagbemi, T. O.( 2011) “Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial  Performance in 

Developing Economies: The Nigerian Experience”. The 2011 New  Orleans international Academic 

Conference. UK Evidence from Disaggregate Measures,  Financial Management 35, 97-116. 

Ullman A. A. (1985), “Data in Search of a Theory: A Critical Examination of the Relationships  among Social 

Performance, Social Disclosure, and Economic Performance of U.S  Firms”. Acad. Manage. Rev. 10: 

pp. 540-557  

Uwuigbe, U. & B. Egbide, (2012), Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosures in Nigeria: A  Study of Listed 

Financial and Non-Financial Firms www.Ccsenet.Org/Jms  Journal of  Management and Sustainability 

Vol. 2, No. 1; March 2012 160 ISSN 1925-4725 E-ISSN  1925-4733 

Vitezić, N. (2011), Correlation between social responsibility and efficient performance in  Croatian enterprises Zb. 

rad. Ekon. fak. Rij. - 2011 - vol. 29 - sv. 2 - 423-442 423  

Waddock, S. A., & S. B. Graves (1997) “The corporate Social Performance and Financial  Performance 

link.” Strategic Management Journal, 18(4): 303-319 

Wissink, R. (2012), Testing the relation between corporate social performance and corporate  financial 

performance. Master thesis  R.B.A Wissink University of Twente  Business  Administration  

Wissink, R.(2012), Testing the relation between corporate social performance and corporate  financial 

performance. Master thesis  R.B.A Wissink University of Twente  Business  Administration  

 Yang, F. Lin, C. and Chang, Y. (2010), the linkage between corporate social performance and  corporate 

financial performance African Journal of Business Management Vol. 4(4), Pp  406-413, April 2010 

Available online at http://www.academicjournals.org/AJBM ISSN  1993-8233 © 2010 Academic 

Journals  

 

 

 

Copyrights 

Copyright for this article is retained by the author(s), with first publication rights granted to the journal. 

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution 

license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) 

http://www.ccsenet.org/Jms
http://www.academicjournals.org/AJBM

