3.1 Links between CSR and Financial performanceThere is still discussion about the relationship between CSR and companies Continuous financial performance (CFP) (Alexander & Buchholz, 1978). The empirical results regarding the nature of the relationship are ambiguous. Some studies Detect a positive relationship, while others find others negative, not even or curved (Eg, U-shaped relationships). Despite this diversity, based on its meta-analyzes, Margolis,Elvenvin, Walsh (2007), Orlitzky, Schmidt and Rynes (2003) conclude that The relationship is more common than other species. A common reason for the vague empirical results is how to apply and measure CSR concepts and CFP concepts.
CFP is usually measured with the profitability ratios recovered from relatively standardized and easily available financial statements. However, for many reasons, measuring CSR is more difficult. The first challenge is the lack of consensus on the implementation of the concept of corporate social responsibility (Dahlsrud, 2008).
The second challenge involves measurement issues.The study aims to review the operation and the alternative measurement The approaches to building CSR and CFP are published in the experimental literature concerned with the relationship of CSR and CFP. Alternative measurement techniques are identified and analysed. The first contribution of this article is a systematic synthesis of the advantages and disadvantages of alternative approaches deployed in current empirical literature. Specific disadvantages that are inherent in most approaches are self-seeking and bias in selection. The second contribution is to suggest possible future paths for measuring CSR that will address these shortcomings. In particular, the study builds a case to standardize and increase the disclosure of CSR information. Such uniformity will not only be useful for the right test.
3.2 Corporate Social Responsibility The study of corporate social responsibility (CSR), and there is still a consensus among those missing on the definition and its constituent dimensions, structures and principles (Crane et al., 2008).In a comprehensive review of literature, Dahlsrud (2008) 37 defined a different definition of CSR. There is considerable variation in these CSR perceptions and definitions. For example, Friedman (1970) argues that “the only social responsibility of a company is to increase its size.3.3 Empirical evidence on the CSR–CFP relationship.
A critical issue in corporate governance and management is the impact of corporate social responsibility on companies’ performance, especially financial performance. The traditional view holds this CSR costly because it is socially responsible to incur additional costs. Social examples responsible actions include investments in pollution control, employee benefits packages, voluntary contributions and community sponsorship.There are studies indicating a negative relationship. This result is consistent with the view that social responsibility bears costs and profitability deteriorates.
In Friedman this behavior is socially irresponsible because the sole responsibility of companies is profit. The negative link between corporate social responsibility and super-lady does not mean the complete abandonment of socially responsible business. Many managers believe it is important to be a good corporate citizen even when they do so at the expense of shareholders (Moser ;Martin, 2012). In addition, shareholders can also be ethical and may need to take CSR even at the expense of low financial performance.3.4 Review of approaches for measuring corporate social responsibility.Measuring CSR is complex for two reasons.
First, as described earlier, the consensus is missing on the theoretical meaning of the concept of CSR II, the concept of multi-dimensional with relatively heterogeneous dimensions because of the lack of consensus and complexity of the concept, it is not surprising that many methods have been used Different in the literature to measure CSR. Different approaches in the following groups can be summed up here as follows: usage, reputation indicators, content analyzes, questionnaire surveys, and one-dimensional measures.3.5 Reputation indicesReputation indicators are usually the multidimensional nature of CSR. CSR has dimensions of assessment of key indicators and dimensions, key themes are similar across indicators (eg, natural environment, staff, community, etc.). It is also worth mentioning the comparison between the MSCI KLD and the Wealth Indices, conducted by Griffin and Mahon (1997), which they revealed Very similar to each other.
3.6 Discussion and conclusionThe impact of CSR on CFP has long been an important issue for managers despite the extensive empirical investigation into the nature of this relationship the empirical literature failed to provide conclusive evidence in this regard. The article focuses on the operational aspects and measurement of research designs in the CSR-CFP experimental literature that may have contributed to mixed results.