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