Journal of Strategic Management Studies

Journal of Strategic Management Studies

Explaining the strategy of disclosure of social responsibility, growth and risk in comparing healthy and distressed companies in the stock market

Document Type : Research

Authors
Bayat Rohullah 1
Ramin Eskandari 2
Soroush Naqizadeh 3
Reza Javani Ghalandari 4
1 Professor, Faculty of Social Science, Imam Khomeini international University, Qazvin, Iran
2 Ph.D. student, Faculty of Social Sciences, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran
3 MA student, Faculty of Social Sciences, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran
4 MA student, Faculty of Management and Accounting, Allamah Tabatabai University, Tehran, Iran
10.22034/smsj.2025.495208.2098
Abstract
Introduction
One of the important concepts that has gained attention in scientific and international circles over the past few decades due to social and environmental changes is sustainable growth and development. In this context, corporate social responsibility (CSR) and its disclosure are regarded as excellent tools for achieving sustainable growth and development, considered a win-win strategy. From a managerial perspective, corporate social responsibility is a manifestation of companies' active roles in achieving sustainable growth and development goals. It can be stated that for growth, sustainability, maintaining competitive advantage, advancing companies, and developing the global economy, corporate social responsibility is vital. Given that demand in the social environment is a dynamic reaction, managers must pay special attention to the disclosure of social responsibility and related activities. In fact, social responsibility and its disclosure are considered essential for companies in order to sustain their operations and grow in the social environment. The disclosure of social responsibility indicators by companies, which reflects their attention to social and environmental performance, leads to improved information disclosure quality and may affect investors' decision-making, financial performance, and growth of companies. From both theoretical and empirical perspectives, examining whether companies are economically efficient enough to undertake social responsibility activities and how social responsibility impacts company performance is significant. Risk, as a key and crucial variable in investment decision-making, has attracted considerable attention in recent research. In this regard, many accounting studies have investigated the relationship between social responsibility and risk. Company risk essentially refers to fundamental changes in companies' profits and is a determining factor related to performance and growth. Considering the economic conditions in Iran in recent years, many companies have faced the risk of being unable to continue their operations due to managerial, financial, economic crises, or political issues, including international sanctions and global crises, leading to financial distress. This issue is particularly important in the context of risk management in the stock market and making optimal decisions regarding social responsibility. The nature of distress is such that some distressed companies may go bankrupt or ultimately remove themselves from the list of distressed companies. Therefore, it is possible that financially distressed companies may improve stakeholders' perceptions, including investors, through enhancing social activities and disclosing them in their reports, thus removing themselves from the list of financially distressed companies. In this regard, the main objective of this research is to elucidate the relationship between the disclosure of social responsibility and company growth and risk, focusing on this relationship in two samples of financially distressed and healthy companies.
 
Methodology
This study investigates the relationship between variables using the method of mean comparison. To test the hypotheses, the necessary data were collected from available sources, including the financial statements of companies and reports from the Tehran Stock Exchange. The time period of this research spans from 2012 to 2021. Annual and monthly data of companies were gathered to calculate the research variables and were tested and analysed by using statistical methods. To test the hypotheses, considering the dependency of the samples (due to the change in the status of some companies from financial distress to healthy status and vice versa over the 10 years studied), the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was first used to determine the distribution type of the variables. Then, for variables with a normal distribution, the dependent T-test (parametric) was used, and for variables without a normal distribution, the Wilcoxon test (non-parametric) was employed.
 
 
 
Results and Discussion
Based on the results of the test, the null hypothesis is rejected at the 95% confidence level. This means that there is a significant difference in the level of social responsibility disclosure between distressed companies and healthy companies at the 95% confidence level. Therefore, the first hypothesis of the research is confirmed at this confidence level. Additionally, considering that the number of observations in the healthy status is greater than those in the distressed status, it indicates that the level of social responsibility disclosure in financially distressed companies is higher than in healthy companies. Thus, the first hypothesis of the research is confirmed at the 95% confidence level. For the second hypothesis of the research, based on the significance level of the test statistic for both growth criteria, the null hypothesis is rejected at the 95% confidence level. Therefore, there is a significant difference in the growth levels of healthy companies compared to distressed companies (for both criteria). Additionally, since the number of observations in the healthy status is greater than those in the distressed status (for both growth criteria), this indicates that the growth level in healthy companies is higher than in distressed companies. Thus, the second hypothesis of the research is confirmed using both growth variable criteria. For the third hypothesis of the research, based on the significance level of the test statistic, the null hypothesis is rejected at the 95% confidence level. Therefore, there is a significant difference between the risk of healthy companies and the expected return and risk premium of distressed companies. Additionally, given that the number of observations in the distressed status is greater than that in the healthy status, this indicates that the level of risk in healthy companies is higher than in distressed companies. Thus, the third hypothesis of the research is confirmed.
Conclusion
The results indicate a positive impact of social responsibility disclosure on growth and risk reduction in companies. It shows that healthy companies can gain more trust and credibility from stakeholders through social responsibility activities. This trust can lead to improved stock market management and increased investments. Furthermore, findings from additional analyses revealed that industries with higher levels of social responsibility disclosure also perform better in terms of growth and risk. The oil products industry, which has the highest average ranking in social responsibility disclosure, is simultaneously ranked highly in terms of growth and risk. This suggests that attention to social responsibility can enhance credibility and trust, thus contributing to the sustainable growth of companies and directly affecting stock market management. Additionally, the mining and pharmaceutical industries, which also exhibit high levels of social responsibility disclosure, show significant growth. Conversely, industries with lower rankings in social responsibility disclosure, such as ceramics and chemicals, are significantly weaker in terms of growth and risk. These results may alert company managers that neglecting social responsibility could lead to reduced growth and increased financial and operational risks.
 
 
Keywords
social responsibility disclosure
growth
risk
Financial distress

Subjects

1.      Albuquerque, R., Koskinen, Y., & Zhang, C. (2019). Corporate social responsibility and firm risk: Theory and empirical evidence. Management science, 65(10), 4451-4469. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2018.3043
2.      Behbahaninia, P. S., & Masih Gol, A. (2024). Social responsibility, company value and stock returns in companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange; The moderating effect of the corona virus epidemic. Journal of Accounting and Social Interests, 14(2), -. doi: 10.22051/jaasci.2024.46371.1833]In Persian[.
3.      Bekhradi nasab, V., & Zholanezhad, F. (2020). The Role of value Moderator of the Brand Name on the Relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance of firms Listed in Tehran Stock Exchange. Journal of Accounting and Social Interests, 10(4), 27-72. https://doi.org/10.22051/ijar.2019.23306.1475 ]In Persian[.
4.      Branco, M. C., & Rodrigues, L. L. (2008). Factors influencing social responsibility disclosure by Portuguese companies. Journal of business Ethics, 83, 685-701. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9658
5.      Ceylan, I. E. (2021). The impact of firm-specific and macroeconomic factors on financial distress risk: A case study from Turkey. Universal Journal of Accounting and Finance, 9(3), 506-517. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujaf.2021.090325
6.      Cho, S. J., Chung, C. Y., & Young, J. (2019). Study on the Relationship between CSR and Financial Performance. Sustainability, 11(2), 343. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020343
7.      Cochran, P. L., & Wood, R. A. (1984). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance. Academy of management Journal, 27(1), 42-56. https://doi.org/10.5465/255956
8.      Dorfleitner, G., & Grebler, J. (2022). Corporate social responsibility and systematic risk: International evidence. The Journal of Risk Finance, 23(1), 85-120. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRF-07-2020-0162
9.      Dai, J., Lu, C., & Qi, J. (2019). Corporate social responsibility disclosure and stock price crash risk: Evidence from China. Sustainability, 11(2), 448.‌ https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020448
10.   Dadashi, N., & Pourali, M. R. (2022). The effect of social responsibility and risk-taking on the performance of companies according to the moderator variable of financial constraint. Journal of Management Accounting and Auditing Knowledge, 11(41), 145-158.‌ {In Persian}
11.   Damoori (Ph.D), D., & Hozhabrie, F. (2019). Impact of Life Cycle on Corporate Restructuring while in Financial Distress. Journal of Accounting Knowledge, 10(2), 113-135. https://doi.org/10.22103/jak.2019.11201.2614 {In Persian}
12.   Ghaemi, M. H., Mohseni, S. A., & Karimi, M. B. (2014). Assessment of Effects of Revenue Management on Firms' Growth. Journal of Accounting Knowledge, 5(16), 137-161. https://doi.org/10.22103/jak.2014.665 {In Persian}
13.   Grossi, Habibullah, Izadinia, Nasser and Dastgir, Mohsen. (2018). The effect of the social responsibility disclosure level on the company's market value. Financial Accounting and Audit Research, 12(46): 51-76. {In Persian}
14.   Hassas Yeganeh, Yahya, Sohrabi, Hossein Ali and Ghavasi Kanari, Mohammad. (2018). The relationship between social responsibility reporting and corporate value. The Financial accounting and auditing researches, 12(45): 1-20]In Persian[.
15.   Kazi, M. H. (2008). Systematic risk factors for Australian stock market returns: a cointegration analysis. Australasian Accounting, Business and Finance Journal, 2(4), 89-101.
16.   Khan, H. U. Z. (2010). The effect of corporate governance elements on corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting: Empirical evidence from private commercial banks of Bangladesh. International Journal of Law and Management, 52(2), 82-109. https://doi.org/10.1108/17542431011029406
17.   Kim, J.B., Zhang, L., 2014. Financial reporting opacity and expected crash risk: evidence from implied volatility smirks. Contemp. Account. Res. 31, 851–875. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12048
18.   Kordestani, G., Ghaderzadeh, S. K., & Haghighat, H. (2018). Impact of social responsibility disclosure on accounting, economic and market based Measures Of corporate performance evaluation. Journal of Accounting Advances, 10(1), 187-217. https://doi.org/10.22099/jaa.2018.26236.1596 {In Persian}
19.   Kordestani, G., Eskandari, R., & Asoodeh, M. (2024). The Role of Fundamental Accounting Variables in Determining Systematic Risk: Financially Distressed and Healthy Corporates. Financial Accounting Knowledge, 11(2), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.30479/jfak.2023.18856.3098 {In Persian}
20.   Lins, K. V., Servaes, H., & Tamayo, A. (2017). Social capital, trust, and firm performance: The value of corporate social responsibility during the financial crisis. the Journal of Finance, 72(4), 1785-1824. https://doi.org/10.1111/jofi.12505
21.   Lee, S.; Kon Kim, Y.; Kim, K. (2016). Corporate Governance, Firm Risk, and Corporate Social Responsibility: Evidence from Korean Firms. The Journal of Applied Business Research: 32(1): 30.
22.   Mahmoodabadi, H., & Zamani, Z. (2016). Investigating the Relationship between Corporate Risk Taking and Financial Performance with Emphasis on Corporate Governance. Empirical Studies in Financial Accounting, 13(49), 141-170. https://doi.org/10.22054/qjma.2016.4197 ]In Persian[.
23.   Mahmud, A., Ding, D., & Hasan, M. M. (2021). Corporate social responsibility: Business responses to Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. SAGE open, 11(1), 2158244020988710. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020988710
24.   Mecaj, A., & Bravo, M. I. G. (2014). CSR actions and financial distress: Do firms change their CSR behavior when signals of financial distress are identified? Modern Economy, 5(4), 259. http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=44520
25.   Mishra, S., & Modi, S. B. (2013). Positive and negative corporate social responsibility, financial leverage, and idiosyncratic risk. Journal of business ethics, 117, 431-448.‌  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1526-9
26.   Markowitz, H, M. (1952). Portfolio Selection. Journal of finance,7(1),77 -91.
27.   Okafor, A., Adeleye, B. N., & Adusei, M. (2021). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: Evidence from US tech firms. Journal of cleaner production, 292, 126078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126078
28.   Pudji, A. (2017). The influence of fundamental factors and systematic risk to stock prices on companies listed in the Indonesian stock exchange. European Research Studies Journal, 230-240.
29.   Ramezannia, H., & Rezaei, F. (2018). Investigating the effect of corporate social responsibility on systemic risk and idiosyncratic risk: Using data envelopment analysis model. 2 (4):189-214]In Persian[.
30.   Rubin, M. (2016). Corporate social responsibility, risk diversification, and firm value: Does corporate social responsibility diversify risk. Risk Diversification, and Firm Value: Does Corporate Social Responsibility Diversify Risk (April 21, 2016).
31.   Saleh, M., Zulkifli, N., & Muhamad, R. (2010). Corporate social responsibility disclosure and its relation on institutional ownership: Evidence from public listed companies in Malaysia. Managerial auditing journal, 25(6), 591-613. https://doi.org/10.1108/02686901011054881
32.   Tainet, Dr. M. Kh & Rai, H (1383). The impact of providing social accounting information on investors' decision-making, Accounting and Auditing Review, 11(3): 73-92. https://doi.org/10.1108/02686901011054881 {In Persian}
33.   Yang, M., Chen, S., Wang, J., & Wang, Y. (2023). Corporate social responsibility and stock price crash risk: does analyst coverage matter? Applied Economics, 55(10), 1045-1061. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2022.2095347
34.   Zandi, A., f, K., & f, N. (2020). Managerial RiskTaking Incentives, Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Risk. Journal of Management Accounting and Auditing Knowledge, 9(34), 229-251]In Persian[.
35.   Zhou, F., Fu, L., Li, Z., & Xu, J. (2022). The recurrence of financial distress: A survival analysis. International Journal of Forecasting, 38(3), 1100-1115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijforecast.2021.12.005
Journal of Strategic Management Studies
Volume 16, Issue 63
Summer 2025
Pages 271-289

  • Receive Date 23 December 2024
  • Revise Date 12 March 2025
  • Accept Date 13 July 2025