Extending “above-the table”-relationships has been a principal objective of corporate social responsibility (CSR) from the very outset. This would provide benefits to the corporation and its stakeholders by getting everyone closely involved in the raison d'être of the business, through inviting them to pose their perspectives and to participate in decision-making. The same applies to sustainable development. However, when it comes to measuring how these efforts can be integrated into overall corporate performance, the major emphasis is on technical data. The main achievements have been consolidated in the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) where each of the indicators prudently measures a well-determined set of facts. But one major discussion point is whether GRI and other reporting frameworks do really reflect the link between the outcome of CSR and economic value, and how they would properly connect to the information used by management for running the business on a day-to-day basis. This article tries to point out that one way out of the disconnectedness might be through expanding the concept of ‘Economic Value Added’ (EVA). EVA measures overall corporate performance by claiming that shareholders gain when the return from the capital employed in a corporation is greater than the cost of that capital. From there it is a short way to proclaiming that all stakeholders gain when the value created by a corporation is greater than the cost of the capital employed in the corporation and the capital employed in whichever commonly available resources outside the corporation are used by its business. The expansion of EVA that is envisaged would be to enlarge the cost of capital by the costs that are caused by that part of ‘Public Goods’ that is available to a corporation. There is one political and one theoretical obstacle in this: the argument is quite radical and complying with it would require some leadership from ‘big corporations’; and valuing public goods is a research field that has not yet reached the stadium of generally accepted applicability, at least with regard to aggregative monetary value. However there are new initiatives under way, e.g. the International Integrated Reporting Committee now formed, among others, by the GRI, which will join forces to reach a breakthrough.

Shifting the Paradigm of Return on Investment: Towards a Composite Index to Measure Overall Corporate Performance

Massaro Maurizio
2013

Abstract

Extending “above-the table”-relationships has been a principal objective of corporate social responsibility (CSR) from the very outset. This would provide benefits to the corporation and its stakeholders by getting everyone closely involved in the raison d'être of the business, through inviting them to pose their perspectives and to participate in decision-making. The same applies to sustainable development. However, when it comes to measuring how these efforts can be integrated into overall corporate performance, the major emphasis is on technical data. The main achievements have been consolidated in the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) where each of the indicators prudently measures a well-determined set of facts. But one major discussion point is whether GRI and other reporting frameworks do really reflect the link between the outcome of CSR and economic value, and how they would properly connect to the information used by management for running the business on a day-to-day basis. This article tries to point out that one way out of the disconnectedness might be through expanding the concept of ‘Economic Value Added’ (EVA). EVA measures overall corporate performance by claiming that shareholders gain when the return from the capital employed in a corporation is greater than the cost of that capital. From there it is a short way to proclaiming that all stakeholders gain when the value created by a corporation is greater than the cost of the capital employed in the corporation and the capital employed in whichever commonly available resources outside the corporation are used by its business. The expansion of EVA that is envisaged would be to enlarge the cost of capital by the costs that are caused by that part of ‘Public Goods’ that is available to a corporation. There is one political and one theoretical obstacle in this: the argument is quite radical and complying with it would require some leadership from ‘big corporations’; and valuing public goods is a research field that has not yet reached the stadium of generally accepted applicability, at least with regard to aggregative monetary value. However there are new initiatives under way, e.g. the International Integrated Reporting Committee now formed, among others, by the GRI, which will join forces to reach a breakthrough.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
2013_BSR.Vol.2-Iss.1-Bardy.&.Massaro.CSR.Index.pdf

non disponibili

Tipologia: Documento in Pre-print
Licenza: Accesso chiuso-personale
Dimensione 708.85 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
708.85 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in ARCA sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10278/3717014
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact