Leadership and Management Leadership and Management Лидерство и менеджмент 2410-1664 BIBLIO-GLOBUS Publishing House 119953 10.18334/lim.11.1.119953 TFZQYO Articles Статьи Research Article The problem of increasing the efficiency of economic activity of Russian companies: empirical analysis of panel data Вопрос повышения эффективности хозяйственной деятельности российских предприятий: эмпирический анализ панельных данных https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9072-38561797-3838 Badykova Idelya Rashitovna Бадыкова Иделя Рашитовна

доцент кафедры бизнес-статистики и экономики, доктор экономических наук

 Idelia.badykova @gmail.com Kazan National Research Technological University Казанский национальный исследовательский технологический университет 31 03 2024 11 1 VOL 11, NO1 (2024) ТОМ 11, №1 (2024) 295 316 20 11 2023 22 11 2023 Copyright ©; 2024, Badykova I.R. Copyright ©; 2024, Бадыкова И.Р. 2024 Badykova I.R. Бадыкова И.Р. https://1economic.ru/lib/119953

Within the framework of this article the solution of the problem of increasing the company's economic efficiency through the implementation of corporate social responsibility policy is scientifically substantiated. The purpose of this article was to study the relationship between the costs of implementing socially responsible behavior of organizations and their economic efficiency for the Russian market using various approaches to economic and mathematical modeling. It is expected that this article will be of scientific interest, since currently in the domestic scientific literature there are not enough works devoted to identifying the relationship of corporate social responsibility with the company's economic efficiency and substantiating an instrumental approach to corporate social responsibility. This article is also of high practical value, which is explained by the possibility of using the conclusions obtained when developing a long-term strategy for the company development.

В рамках данной статьи научно обосновывается решение проблемы повышения эффективности хозяйственной деятельности компаний посредством использования политики корпоративной социальной ответственности. Целью данной работы является исследование взаимосвязи расходов на реализацию социально ответственного поведения организаций и их экономической эффективности для российского рынка с использованием различных подходов к экономико-математическому моделированию. Ожидается, что данная статья будет представлять научный интерес, поскольку в настоящее время в отечественной научной литературе недостаточно работ посвящено выявлению связи корпоративной социальной ответственности с эффективностью экономической деятельности предприятий и обоснованию инструментального подхода к корпоративной социальной ответственности. Данная работа представляет и высокую практическую ценность, что объясняется возможностью использования полученных автором выводов при разработке долгосрочной стратегии развития компаний.

 company's economic efficiency corporate social responsibility Russian company empirical analysis panel data эффективность хозяйственной деятельности предприятий; корпоративная социальная ответственность; российские компании; эмпирический анализ; панельные данные 1. Бадыкова И.Р. Влияние развития искусственного интеллекта на корпоративную социальную ответственность // Креативная экономика. – 2023. – № 9. – c. 3283-3298. – doi: 10.18334/ce.17.9.118816. 2. Бадыкова И.Р. Финансовая результативность стейкхолдерской политики в условиях экономической нестабильности: эмпирический анализ по панельным данным // Экономический анализ: теория и практика. – 2020. – № 4(499). – c. 764-779. – doi: 10.24891/ea.19.4.764. 3. Гизатуллин А.В. Корпоративное управление, социальная ответственность и финансовая эффективность компании // Российский журнал менеджмента. – 2007. – № 1. – c. 35-66. 4. Древинг С.Р., Хрустова Л.Е. Нефинансовые факторы формирования стоимости в системе финансового контроля стратегии развития холдинга // Финансы. – 2018. – № 6. – c. 53-68. – doi: 10.26794/2587-5671-2018-22-6-53-68. 5. Кельчевская Н.Р., Черненко И.М., Попова Е.В. Влияние корпоративной социальной ответственности на инвестиционную привлекательность российских компаний // Экономика региона. – 2017. – № 1. – c. 157-169. – doi: 10.17059/2017-1-15. 6. Коньков А.Т., Бакунов А.В. Корпоративная социальная ответственность как стратегия минимизации рисков в деятельности зарубежных нефтегазовых компаний // Социология. – 2021. – № 2. – c. 146-152. 7. Ховаев С.Ю., Кожевников А.Д. Взаимосвязь уровня корпоративной социальной ответственности и результатов деятельности организации // Бизнес. Образование. Право. Вестник Волгоградского института бизнеса. – 2016. – № 2(35). – c. 165-169. 8. Чеглакова Л.М., Батаева Б.С., Мелитонян О.А. Характерные черты социальной ответственности и этики в организациях малого и среднего бизнеса // Российский журнал менеджмента. – 2018. – № 1. – c. 63-94. – doi: 10.21638/11701/spbu18.2018.103. 9. Ali H.Y., Danish R.Q., Asrar‐ul‐Haq M. How corporate social responsibility boosts firm financial performance: The mediating role of corporate image and customer satisfaction // Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. – 2020. – № 1. – p. 166-177. – doi: 10.1002/csr.1781. 10. Bamett M. Stakeholder influence capacity and the variability of financial returns to corporate social responsibility // Academy of Management Review. – 2007. – № 3. – p. 794-816. – doi: 10.5465/amr.2007.25275520. 11. Beck C., Frost G., Jones S. CSR disclosure and financial performance revisited: A cross-country analysis // Australian Journal of Management. – 2018. – № 4. – p. 517-537. – doi: 10.1177%2F0312896218771438. 12. Belkaoui A., Karpik P.G. Determinants of the corporate decision to disclose social information // Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal. – 1989. – № 1. – p. 36-51. – doi: 10.1108/09513578910132240. 13. Benabou R., Tirole J. Individual and corporate social responsibility // Economica. – 2010. – № 305. – p. 1-19. – doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0335.2009.00843.x. 14. Cennamo C., Berrone P., Gomez-Mejia L.R. Does stakeholder management have a dark side? // Journal of Business Ethics. – 2009. – № 4. – p. 491-507. – doi: 10.1007/s10551-008-0012-x. 15. Chin-Chen Y., Fengyi L., Teng-Shih W., Chia-Ming W. Does corporate social responsibility affect cost of capital in China? // Asia Pacific Management Review. – 2020. – № 1. – p. 1-12. – doi: 10.1016/j.apmrv.2019.04.001. 16. Contini M., Annunziata E., Rizzi F., Frey M. Exploring the influence of corporate social responsibility (CSR) domains on consumers’ loyalty: An experiment in BRICS countries // Journal of Cleaner Production. – 2020. – p. 119158. – doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119158. 17. Davidson W.N., Worrell D.L. A comparison and test of the use of accounting and stock market data in relating corporate social responsibility and financial performance // Akron Business and Economic Review. – 1990. – № 21. – p. 7-19. 18. Doh J.P., Howton S.D., Howton S.W., Siegel D.S. Does the market respond to an endorsement of social respon sibility? The role of institutions, information, and legitimacy // Journal of Management. – 2010. – № 6. – p. 1461-1485. – doi: 10.1177/0149206309337896. 19. Edmans A. Does the stock market fully value intangibles? Employee satisfaction and equity prices // Journal of Financial Economics. – 2011. – № 3. – p. 621-640. – doi: 10.1016/j.jfineco.2011.03.021. 20. Friede G., Busch T., Bassen A. ESG and financial performance: aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies // Journal of Sustainable Finance Investment. – 2015. – № 4. – p. 210-233. – doi: 10.1080/20430795.2015.1118917. 21. Friedman M. The social responsibility business is to increase its profits. New York Times Magazine. [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://websites.umich.edu/~thecore/doc/Friedman.pdf. 22. Galant A., Cadez S. Corporate social responsibility and financial performance relationship: a review of measurement approaches // Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja. – 2017. – № 1. – p. 676-693. – doi: 10.1080/1331677X.2017.1313122. 23. Godfrey P.C., Merrill C.B., Hansen J.M. The relationship between corporate social responsibility and shareholder value; An empirical test of the risk management hypothesis // Strategic Management Journal. – 2009. – № 4. – p. 425-445. – doi: 10.1002/smj.750. 24. Greening D.W., Turban D.B. Corporate social performance as a competitive advantage in attracting a quality workforce // Business and Society. – 2000. – № 3. – p. 254-280. – doi: 10.1177/000765030003900302. 25. Griffin J.J., Mahon J.F. The Corporate Social Performance and Corporate Financial Performance Debate: Twenty-Five Years of Incomparable Research // Business and Society. – 1997. – № 1. – p. 5-31. – doi: 10.1177/000765039703600102. 26. Hasan I., Kobeissi N., Liu L., Wang H. Corporate social responsibility and firm financial performance: The mediating role of productivity // Journal of Business Ethics. – 2018. – № 3. – p. 671-688. – doi: 10.1007/s10551‐016‐3066‐1. 27. Hong Z., Li G., Lin W. Corporate social responsibility and credit spreads: An empirical study in Chinese context // Annals of Economics and Finance. – 2016. – № 17. – p. 79-103. 28. Jayachandran S., Kalaignanam K., Eilert M. Product and environmental social performance: varying effect on firm performance // Strategic Management Journal. – 2013. – № 10. – p. 1255-1264. – doi: 10.1002/smj.2054. 29. Jensen M.C. Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function // Business Ethics Quarterly. – 2002. – № 2. – p. 235. – doi: 10.2307/3857812. 30. Karnani A. Doing well by doing good: The grand illusion // California Management Review. – 2011. – № 2. – p. 69-86. – doi: 10.1525/cmr.2011.53.2.69. 31. Kim K.H., Kim M., Qian C. Effects of corporate social responsibility on corporate financial performance: A competitive‐action perspective // Journal of Management. – 2018. – № 3. – p. 1097-1118. – doi: 10.1177/0149206315602530. 32. King A., Lenox M., Terlaak A. The strategic use of decentralized institutions: Exploring certification with the ISO 14001 management standard // Academy of Management Journal. – 2005. – № 6. – p. 1091-1106. – doi: 10.5465/amj.2005.19573111. 33. Lee J.H., Byun H.S., Park K.S. Product market competition and corporate social responsibility activities: Perspectives from an emerging economy // Pacific-Basin Finance Journal. – 2018. – p. 60-80. – doi: 10.1016/j.pacfin.2018.04.001. 34. Lev B., Petrovits C., Radhakrishnan S. Is doing good good for you? How corporate charitable contributions enhance revenue growth // Strategic Management Journal. – 2010. – № 2. – p. 182-200. – doi: 10.1002/smj.810. 35. Levy D.L., Kaplan R. Corporate social responsibility and theories of global governance. / In book: Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility. - Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. – 432-451 p. 36. Lins K. V., Servaes H., Tamayo A. Social capital, trust, and firm performance: the value of corporate social responsibility during the financial crisis // Journal of Finance. – 2017. – № 4. – p. 1785-1824. – doi: 10.1111/jofi.12505. 37. Luo X., Wang,H., Raithel S., Zheng Q. Corporate social performance, analysit stock recommenations, and firm future returns // Strategic Management Journal. – 2015. – № 1. – p. 123-126. – doi: 10.1002/smj.2219. 38. Matten D., Moon J. “Implicit” and “explicit” CSR; A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility // Academy of Management Review. – 2008. – p. 404-424. – doi: 10.5465/AMR.2008.31193458. 39. McWilliams A., Siegel D.S. Creating and capturing value; Strategic corporate social responsibility, resource-based theory, and sustainable competitive advantage // Journal of Management. – 2011. – № 5. – p. 1480-1495. – doi: 10.1177/0149206310385696. 40. Montiel I., Husted B., Christmann P. Using private management standard certification to reduce information asymmetries in corrupt environments // Strategic Management Journal. – 2012. – p. 1103-1113. – doi: 10.2307/23261320. 41. Porter M.E., Kramer M.R. The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility // Harvard Business Review. – 2006. – № 12. – p. 78-79. 42. Ruf B.M., Muralidhar K., Brown R.M., Janney Ja.J., Paul K. An empirical investigation of the relationship between change in corporate social performance and financial performance: A stakeholder theory perspective // Journal of Business Ethics. – 2001. – № 2. – p. 143-156. 43. Shan X., Duchi L., Jianbai H. Corporate social responsibility, the cost of equity capital and ownership structure: An analysis of Chinese listed firms // Australian Journal of Management. – 2015. – № 2. – p. 245-276. – doi: 10.1177/0312896213517894. 44. Su W., Peng M., Tan W., Cheung Y. The Signaling Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility in Emerging Economies // Journal of Business Ethics. – 2016. – № 3. – p. 479-491. – doi: 10.1007/s10551-014-2404-4. 45. Surroca J., Trib J.A., Waddock S. Corporate responsibility and financial performance; the role of intangible resources // Strategic Management Journal. – 2010. – № 5. – p. 463-490. – doi: 10.1002/smj.820. 46. Tschopp D., Nastanski M. The harmonization and convergence of corporate social responsibility reporting standards // Journal of Business Ethics. – 2014. – № 1. – p. 147-162. – doi: 10.1007/s10551-013-1906-9. 47. Van Beurden P., Gëssling T. The worth of values – A literature review on the relation between corporate social and financial performance // Journal of Business Ethics. – 2008. – № 2. – p. 407-424. – doi: 10.1007/s10551-008-9894-x. 48. Visser W. Corporate social responsibility in developing countries. / In book: Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility. - Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. – 473-499 p. 49. Waddock S.A., Graves S.B. The corporate social performance - financial performance link // Strategic Management Journal. – 1997. – № 18. – p. 303-319. – doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199704)18:43.0.CO;2-G. 50. Walker M., Kent A. Do fans care? Assessing the influence of corporate social responsibility on consumer attitudes in the sport industry // Journal of Sport Management. – 2009. – № 6. – p. 743-769. – doi: 10.1123/jsm.23.6.743. 51. Wuttichindanon S. Corporate social responsibility disclosure choices of report and its determinants: Empirical evidence from firms listed on the Stock Exchange of Thailand // Kasetsar Journal of Social Sciences. – 2017. – № 2. – p. 156-162. – doi: 10.1016/j.kjss.2016.07.002.