The Industrial Revolution In Great Britain Sample Essay

The Industrial Revolution, which centered on textile manufacturing in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, took place predominantly without the use of science in England and continental Europe. The alkali business, for example, grew in response to the demand for washing and bleaching raw cotton and wool. Industrial growth, however, could only go so far without research (Cardwell, 1972, p. 100). In order for manufacturing to remain economically competitive, it would be necessary to make decisions about how to implement more scientific techniques, as well as the technology utilized in Egypt’s Pyramids. Most of this information was learned through trial and error rather than through scientific research.

The goal of science is to discover the fundamental principles and patterns of the natural world, as well as to classify and characterize the various sorts of objects that can be found. With calcium carbonate, phosphorus and calcium sulphate, for example, slag does not dissolve in the molten iron. This method is scientific if you are aware of these facts and have developed a procedure that takes them into consideration. For science to support technology, facts must be known and utilized in the design process. While, technical advancements were more a result of trial and error than science. Altering the charge composition and observing the results helped ironmasters to improve ore smelting. This was a form of art in and of itself. It was through the incorporation of scientific facts that Thomas’s process of smelting iron ore evolved from its original state of trial and error. These early cotton business creators were also not scientifically-minded, as evidenced by this fact (Ashworth & Landes, 1970, p. 258).

As technology becomes more complex, the chances of a smartphone being invented through trial-and-error reduce. An approach to tackling a problem is a series of missteps. It is possible to find solutions to problems by repeatedly altering one variable at a time until success is achieved. It is common to employ trial and error as a final resort when there is no evident rule to follow in simple activities or video games. When it comes to complex technologies, such as smartphones or the ironmaking process, trial and error is practically impossible. Before the design process can begin, it is necessary to understand scientific facts. Throughout the history of science and technology, the Industrial Revolution was a pivotal moment in time (Wilmer, H. et al., 2017).

Industrial production processes, technical change, and technological advancement aided in the development of the industrial revolution. Historians assert that the textile industry’s shift in work practices was a major factor in the onset of the Industrial Revolution. Rail transportation was an important industry in and of itself, generating jobs and capital expenditures, and necessitating the expenditure of monetary resources. In addition to providing a low-cost means of moving people, goods, and raw materials across the country, railroads also gave rise to a thriving business in the process (Clark, 1985, p. 146).

Science and technology have played a significant role in the development of products and services in the UK since the Industrial Revolution. Science may have played a role in the Industrial Revolution because of this. Also, it’s possible that science is working with technology during the Industrial Revolution. It is debatable if science played a significant impact in the Industrial Revolution. Applied science appears to have played a little role in the early stages of cotton’s development. Musson and Robinson, (1969) provide evidence that some of the most prominent conservatives, such as Kay and Arkwright, have little to no scientific background. Consequently, mechanical research may have had an indirect impact on the innovation process, but the inventions in question are not mechanical in any way.

References

Ashworth, W., & Landes, D. S. (1970). The Unbound Prometheus: Technological Change and Industrial Development in Western Europe from 1750 to the Present. The Economic Journal80(317), 154. https://doi.org/10.2307/2230464

Cardwell, D. S. L. (1972). General – Technology, Science and History. London: Heinemann

Clark, L. (1985). Groundwater abstraction from Basement Complex areas of Africa. Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology18(1), 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1144/gsl.qjeg.1985.018.01.05

Musson, A. E., & Robinson, E. (1969). Science and technology in the industrial revolution. Manchester: University Press of Manchester.

Wilmer, H. H., Sherman, L. E., & Chein, J. M. (2017, April 25). Smartphones and cognition: A review of research exploring the links between mobile technology habits and cognitive functioning. Frontiers in Psychology. Frontiers Media S.A. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00605

The Influence Of Gender And Other Power Disparities On Work In A Cross-Cultural Context Sample Assignment

Introduction

Discrimination and inequality have been issues in the workplace since industrialization began in different times in different societies. The disparities affect the workplace environment, the working experience of the group being discriminated against, workplace policies, and the economic status of minority groups. Gender inequality has silenced women’s voices in the workplace and created an image of how a woman should behave in society. Economic disparity has led to cultural inequality in the workplace. The privileged group is in high-paying jobs, and the minorities are in low-paying jobs, further widening the gap in society. This paper discusses how various aspects in society and the workplace have led to inequality and its influence on work.

Gender roles

Gender roles in most cultures dictate that women are the caregivers and the household responsibilities are theirs, even though these gender roles are more emphasized in some cultures than others. In some cultures, women try to balance the work and household responsibilities of being mothers and wives. They end up supplying fewer working hours to their workplaces than men. The less work output increases the risk of women being forced to work in lower-quality jobs (World Bank, 2011). A good example is in Japan, where a woman, whether educated and working or not, is under social pressure to get married and have children. Women in Japanese households have a lot of responsibilities, such as creating family budgets making decisions on family lifestyles, on top of the expected responsibilities of childrearing and household maintenance (“The Cross-Cultural Perspective | Introduction to Sociology,” 2017).

Stereotypes and Expectations according to gender

Stereotypes exist that put women in some careers and men in others. Men are stereotyped to belong to careers that require strength, and women are stereotyped to belong to jobs that revolve around nurturing and sometimes beauty. These stereotypes are highlighted more in some cultures than others. Therefore, finding people in careers stereotyped to belong to the opposite gender are discriminated against or denied job opportunities. For example, a female foreperson can be denied a job opportunity in a construction site because foreperson positions are expected to be occupied by men. The majority of nurses are women across the globe (Boniol et al., 2019). In the US, 90.8% of hairdressers are women (Statista Research Department, 2022).

A common assumption in society about women is that they are emotional. Therefore, when a woman exhibits anger in the workplace, she is termed hysterical. However, when a man exhibits these attributes, no single person will call him hysterical. Outspoken women in the workplace who exhibit confidence and assertiveness are at a higher risk of being termed disruptive, aggressive, and frightening than men. Athene Donald at Cambridge is an example of an outspoken woman in the workplace. According to her testimony, some of her colleagues feel she is dangerous due to her character (Bostock, 2014).

In organizations where women are a minority, it is hard for their voices to be heard. In meetings where men are the majority, women have testified to not being given a chance to participate, men talking over them, and their input being credited to the man who talked over her. In such organizations, the probability of the leadership having a woman present is low. Therefore, the policies passed and decisions made end up being inconsiderate of women employees or gender discriminative. Men employees are also known for excluding women colleagues in their informal socialization. Wendy Pullan describes it as a ‘boys’ club,’ where her male colleagues exclude her in their banter (Bostock, 2014).

Power disparities based on culture – Economic inequality

Cultural minorities have high chances of living in low-income neighborhoods due to the effects of immigration and socioeconomic position. In these neighborhoods, there is high discrimination concerning race. This discrimination also spreads to the workplaces (Piekut, 2021). Those people who live in ghettos have limited educational and economic resources. A significant number do not complete their studies, limiting their qualifications for high-income job positions. Therefore, they end up in low-paying jobs such as janitorial positions and support staff. In the described situation, these people are distinctively from minority cultures. Therefore an organization in such an environment finds itself that the dominant culture is in leadership positions and high paying jobs, and the minority culture is in the low paying jobs. This depicts cultural inequality in the workplace.

Reduced employee engagement

Some organizations have cultures and policies that lead to gender inequality. In some organizations, women are paid less than men, take longer to be promoted and occupy fewer leadership positions. As a result, women acquire a lower socioeconomic status when compared to men. A contributing factor is the expected responsibilities of women. As the designated household caregivers and nurturers, their careers come second, or they are forced to put in fewer work hours. This leads to less pay, less promotion, and consequently, fewer leadership opportunities. As a result, the present women in the organization get frustrated, which affects the workplace environment. Tensions are high, possibly leading to disengaged employees (Bostock, 2014).

Conclusion

Discrimination usually occurs when a certain smaller group exhibits noticeable differences from the majority group. The workplace is a small segment of society where people of different gender, culture, economic status, and other aspects interact on a daily basis. The discrimination and equality experienced in the workplace represent the discrimination and equality taking place in society. Organizations should strive to diminish cultural, gender, and economic inequality by creating policies that ensure equal representation and opportunities for minority groups.

References

Boniol, M., Mcisaac, M., Xu, L., Wuliji, T., Diallo, K., & Campbell, J. (2019). Gender equity in the health workforce: Analysis of 104 countries Health Workforce Working paper 1. Retrieved from https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/311314/WHO-HIS-HWF-Gender-WP1-2019.1-eng.pdf

Bostock, J. (2014). The meaning of success : insights from women at Cambridge Chapter 3 : Gender and its effect on working life. Retrieved from https://www.cam.ac.uk/women-at-cambridge/chapters-and-themes/chapter-3-gender-and-its-effect-on-working-life

Piekut, A. (2021). Re-Theorising Spatial Segregation: A European Perspective. The Urban Book Series, 13–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-74544-8_2

Statista Research Department. (2022, January 11). U.S.: hairdressers, hairstylists, and cosmetologists by gender 2020. Retrieved March 19, 2022, from Statista website: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1086926/share-hairdressers-hairstylists-cosmetologists-united-states-gender/#:~:text=GenderdistributionofhairdressershairstylistsandcosmetologistsintheU.S.2020&text=In202090.8percent

The Cross-Cultural Perspective | Introduction to Sociology. (2017). Retrieved from Lumenlearning.com website: https://courses.lumenlearning.com/cochise-sociology-os/chapter/the-cross-cultural-perspective/

World Bank. (2011). Gender Differences in Employment and Why They Matter. Retrieved March 19, 2022, from GSDRC website: https://gsdrc.org/document-library/gender-differences-in-employment-and-why-they-matter/#:~:text=Womenaremorelikelyto

The Key Factors And Economic Consequences Of Disclosure Quality Free Essay

Introduction

This study examines the key factors and economic consequences of disclosure quality or nonfinancial information reporting, which is assessed in terms of ratings for Green Banking Disclosures, Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting/Performance (CSR), Environmental, Social, and Governance (EGS), Financial Inclusion Reporting and Social Performance/Social Reporting, among other categories of data. The EU’s intention to require all publicly traded firms to utilize International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) as the basis for their financial statements is the primary motivation for this study (GAAP). Nonfinancial information reporting is investigated in this study by recognizing and examining, the characteristics of economic consequences, the characteristics of nonfinancial information, describing how nonfinancial data must be disclosed in the financial statements, the assimilation of financial and nonfinancial data, as well as discussing of the potential effects of nonfinancial information reporting.

Non-financial Information

The accounting system may provide nonfinancial information, which is a significant part of accounting information. However, in contrast to financial data, it does not completely fit the description, quantitative, reliable and pertinent. Financial data may be used to meet quantitative needs.. Most nonfinancial information, such as corporate social responsibility reporting/performance (CSR), ESG reporting, green banking disclosures and so on can’t be quantifiably recognized. However, this does not negate the fact that it has a significant impact on the current state of the stock market. Academics and forecasters are increasingly placing nonfinancial information above financial information. Several studies (Gee, 2006; Blake & Lunt, 2001) have looked at the influence of IFRS and GAAP acceptance and execution on shareholder security and efficient markets, as well as the potential economic repercussions of nonfinancial information disclosure.

In the eyes of economists and scholars alike, the importance of disclosing nonfinancial information is on par with disclosing financial data. Corporate social responsibility and responsible conduct are severely hampered by the absence of nonfinancial information disclosure. Risk mitigation and long-term social, environmental, and economic results and competitiveness in the market may be improved by the disclosure of nonfinancial information by corporations (Johnson, Scholes & Whittington, 2008). It’s a way to reinforce the firm’s financial market performance’s security and consistency for the communities that are most impacted by nonfinancial reporting.

Key categories of non-financial information:

  1. Corporate Social Responsibility: According to Cromwell, 2015, it is a management model to corporate sustainable development principles for championing welfare programs within the workplace culture or outside of it, utilising corporate ethical beliefs, continuing to help the effective utilization and management of company assets, and preserving nature.
  2. Sustainability: Maintaining the delicate balance between economic demands, human needs, and ecosystems and natural resources is a key component of sustainable development (Crane & Matten, 2010).
  3. Integrated Reporting: According to Eccles & Saltzman, 2011, Sustainability reports and financial statements are combined to provide an integrated reporting system that demonstrates a company’s capacity to create and maintain value . In addition, the Integrated Reporting Framework (IRF) provides assistance.
  4. Sustainability Reporting: The process of gathering and subsequently publishing information on a company’s non-financial performance, such as its social, environmental, and ethical issues, as well as the definition of metrics and sustainability targets based on an organization’s strategy, is known as sustainability reporting (Spector, 2012). Global Reporting Initiatives (GRI) is typically used to create sustainability reporting methods and criteria in the field, which is how sustainability reporting is often carried out.

Advantages of Non-Financial Reporting

Nonfinancial Reporting provides a number of advantages for the organization. The following are some of these benefits: saving organizational resources, controlling operating costs, managing risks, improving overall efficiency and process management in the organization, increasing business credibility and reputation, differentiating from the competition, generating business leads and exposure in the media, strengthening customer relationship and retention, strengthening relationship with customs officials, enhancing relationship with customs officials.

Economic Consequences:

Disclosure of nonfinancial information has the primary goal of informing investors and analysts about the operations of the company, as well as the timing and degree of uncertainty around future earnings estimates. A growing number of academic scholars and industry analysts have begun to recognize the value of sharing nonfinancial information, as well as the negative economic and financial ramifications of not doing so (Boubaker & Nguyen, 2012). While some analysts believe that publishing nonfinancial information alongside financial data reduces the gap between investors and firms, others argue that it also increases openness inside corporations. Non-financial information, such as the environmental impacts of a company’s commercial activities, is becoming more important as the relevance of CSR and environmental concerns grows internationally. If nonfinancial information reporting standards are not adopted, one of the most significant economic consequences is that businesses would be deprived of opportunities for growth that would have been available had they done so. Since 1971, according to a number of academic studies, firms have been more interested in disclosing nonfinancial information (Beresford & Feldman, 1976; Abbott and Monsen, 1979). Bowen’s “Social Responsibilities of Businessman” was the first explicit publication on the CSR subject in 1950.

There is a link between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and economic success. Investors, government executives, and stockholders may benefit from a company’s commitment to social responsibility. It’s possible to get financial rewards by strengthening your links with these individuals and organizations. Investing decisions are heavily influenced by an institution’s social conduct, according to (Rosen et al., 1991). In other words, a good CSR reputation may help companies get access to more funding. CSR and economic repercussions have yet to be conclusively linked by researchers.

Researchers, on the other hand, have suggested that CSR investments have a detrimental impact on an organization’s bottom line because of the extra expenditures they incur. McGuire et al., (1998) claimed that “making significant philanthropic donations, advocating community planning, and others” are all factors that contribute to the increasing cost (p. 855). As a result of these elevated operating expenses, enterprises who don’t implement CSR policies may find themselves at a competitive disadvantage. The following are some of the economic ramifications of disclosing non-financial information:

Sustainability Benchmark; The achievement of sustainability criteria is a major economic consequence of nonfinancial information. Companies may compare their sustainable level achievements with those of their rivals using several sustainability metrics and evaluations, such as the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), MSCI, Sustainalytics, and the Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI) (Department for Business Innovation and Skills, 2014). Companies who do not disclose their nonfinancial performance are reducing their general credibility by not participating in the standards and sustainability assessments that have a negative impact on their reputation.

Debt Market; When examining the economic ramifications of nonfinancial information, the trade analyst evaluates its influence on the debt market as well. Among scholars, there is broad agreement that releasing nonfinancial information benefits organizations, since it demonstrates more openness and attracts new sources of investment, finance, and development from outside the company (Cooper, Frank & Kemp, 2000). It is also widely accepted that more disclosure of nonfinancial information contributes to reduced debt levels, since greater openness allows the businesses obtain equity capital more readily.

Cost of Capital; Researchers disagree on whether companies that use CSR have lower equity capital requirements than those that don’t do it at all. As a matter of fact, these reasoning rest heavily on the scale of a company’s investment opportunities and its risk involved. Researchers and previous literature assessments have determined that CSR or other nonfinancial information disclosure has a detrimental influence on a company’s capital costs. (Christmann, 2000), a s a result, the overall cost of ownership goes up. However, present scholars also concur with this study, but they also acknowledge that although transparency increases the capital cost, it also strengthens the company’s image and credibility as well.

Increased Investors’ Confidence: Revealing of nonfinancial information boosts investors’ trust, according to contemporary trade experts and scholars. While determining investment selections, speculators and investors are becoming more aware of the company’s CSR and ESG practices. They have refuted Belkaoui’s (1976) notion that companies that do not disclose nonfinancial information always outperform those that do.

Integration of Two Different Concepts and Economic Consequences

A broad variety of sustainability-related accounting and reporting activities increasingly recognize the need of disclosing nonfinancial information (NFI) and implementing IR at a big scale, which will require significant changes to corporate business strategies. Rather than focusing on transactional or operational issues, these reports will provide a holistic view of an organization’s overall performance rather than a narrow audit compliance or financial reporting perspective, and will include qualitative and quantitative information from both qualitative and quantitative sources. As a result, the economic implications stated in sustainability or other nonfinancial information reporting may also include the influence on overall performance and consequences of organization activities, according to sustainability and development accounting Even while financial reporting components are important, companies also need to take into account economic, social and nonfinancial aspects of their operations to ensure long-term value generation while conserving or enhancing capital as defined from a variety of viewpoints.

Consequences of Nonfinancial Information Reporting

Non-financial information has been more important to major institutional investors in recent years, and they prefer it when making investment decisions. The reason for this is because the integrated reporting gives information that may satisfy the needs of the stakeholders. This can help companies accomplish their strategic objectives because of the financial performance and economic ramifications of revealing nonfinancial information (Dhaliwal et al, 2011). Analysis of CSR performance and financial success by Nemours shows that a high quality CSR report by the organization will lead to favorable financial performance (Gao, Dong, Ni and Fu, 2015). As a result, the corporation may lower the cost of financing by improving its CSR disclosures.

The link between financial success and corporate social responsibility (CSR) has recently been studied by an increasing number of companies. El Ghoul, Guedhami, Kwok, and Mishra (2010) shows that CSR performance is linked to equity capital costs for enterprises. When the cost of capital is the internal rate of return and the ratio should be needed because of the market’s perception of riskiness, it is necessary to examine if the market can meet a firm’s future cash flow to ensure that the existing market value can be maintained. The company with social responsibility should be interested in the reduced equity financing costs if the impression of riskiness affects the organization. As a result, it suggests that rigorous disclosure rules, reduced equity capital costs, and more efficient corporate governance may prevent asymmetric information from becoming a problem for the organization. It is also vital to consider the cost of equity when making long-term investment and growth decisions. The term “return ratio” refers to the idea that a company’s CSR efforts may be seen as a financial return (El Ghoul, et al. 2010). Consequently, El Ghoul et al. (2010) found that when they adjusted for other firm-specific drivers, businesses with a stronger CSR quality saved equity capital costs. Additional benefits include showing how environmental policies and product plans are linked to employee accountability while also helping to lower the firm’s capital expenditures.

According to Dhaliwal et al. (2012), reporting on corporate social responsibility (CSR) will improve analyst projections. The cost of capital is more readily influenced, especially in countries with a strong focus on stakeholders. According to Fang et al. (2015), the supply of analysts may be increased via better transparency. Because high-quality CSR makes it simpler for companies to acquire and analyze data and information. analysts have a simpler time gathering and processing data. Analysts’ attention is more likely to be drawn to companies that provide high-quality CSR disclosures, as this example shows. The quality of a company’s CSR disclosures will have an impact on its stock price. Transparency is improved and negative concerns are lessened with higher-quality disclosure, as shown by Dhaliwal et al (2012). Improving the quality of the company’s CSR disclosures may have a positive economic impact. There are two reasons for this: First, the expense of preparing nonfinancial reporting is prohibitive for most organizations, and second, the disclosures often result in positive outcomes for them. Nonfinancial information, according to a recent research, may boost stakeholder confidence and minimize information asymmetry to some extent. Because of this, it can maintain the stock price stable in a highly competitive market (Lins et al, 2017).

Covid-19 effects of the sustainable firms

In order to move toward more sustainable and resilient society and economies, enhanced non-financial reporting may play a crucial role. More than ever, companies need to be aware of the environmental and social consequences of their actions, as well as to take responsibility for their influence on nature, people and the economy. Sharing more than just financial information with investors and other stakeholders may help them better understand the entire performance and impact of businesses and other organizations. Demand for better and more available financial and non-financial information from corporations has grown steadily over the years due to investors’ and society’s expectations, as well as legal requirements. Non-financial rules, guidelines, and frameworks have risen as a consequence, and firms may now use them to improve their operations. In the long run, this proliferation of projects might undermine the overall use and credibility of non-financial reporting by creating a complex picture. A solution to the need for better non-financial reporting must now be found by working together.

Conclusion

Specifically, this paper examined the necessity of providing nonfinancial information, as well as the economic ramifications of such disclosure, in terms of capital costs and the effect on the debt market. We also looked at the opinions of two types of researchers: those who support nonfinancial reporting disclosure and see it as having good advantages for the firm, and those who are opposed to it because they perceive increasing capital costs as the negative consequences of such implementations. The study found that organizations that react effectively to non-financial reporting did well since there was an increase in the demand for such information from outside stakeholders. We also found that firms with positive nonfinancial disclosure performed better than those that did not disclose nonfinancial information or disclosed negative information. Nonfinancial information disclosure has been shown to raise capital costs, as both contemporary and classic theorists agree, but it is also true that organizations that follow this practice have more consumer trust and value than those that do not.

References

Abbott, W., & Monsen, R. (1979). On the Measurement of Corporate Social Responsibility: SelfReported Disclosures as a Method of Measuring Corporate Social Involvement. Academy Of Management Journal, 22(3), 501-515. doi: 10.2307/255740

Beresford, D.R., & S.A. Feldman. (1976). Companies increase social-responsibility disclosure, Management Accounting, 57(9), 51

Blake, J., & Lunt, H. (2001). Accounting standards. Harlow, Essex, England: Pearson Education.

Boubaker, S., & Nguyen, D. (2012). Board directors and corporate social responsibility. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Christmann, P. (2000). Effects Of “Best Practices” Of Environmental Management on Cost Advantage: The Role of Complementary Assets. Academy Of Management Journal, 43(4), 663-680.

Cooper, R., Frank, G., & Kemp, R. (2000). A Multinational Comparison of Key Ethical Issues, Helps and Challenges in the Purchasing and Supply Management Profession: The Key Implications for Business and the Professions. Journal Of Business Ethics, 23(1), 83-100.

Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2010). Business ethics (3rd ed., p. 34). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Cromwell, J. (2015). What Ethical Responsibilities Does an Organization Have to a Different Stakeholder?. http://smallbusiness.chron.com/ethical-responsibilitiesorganization-different-stakeholder-35595.html

Department for Business Innovation and Skills. (2014). CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY Good for Business & Society: government response to call for views on corporate responsibility. London.

Dhaliwal, D., Radhakrishnan, S., Tsang, A. and Yang, Y. (2011). Nonfinancial Disclosure and Analyst Forecast Accuracy: International Evidence on Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure. SSRN Electronic Journal, 87(3), pp.723-759.

Eccles, R., & Saltzman, D. (2011). Achieving Sustainability Through Integrated Reporting[Ebook] (1st ed., pp. 1-5). Stanford Social Innovation Review: Leland Stanford Jr. University. http://www.people.hbs.edu/reccles/2011su_features_ecclessaltzman.pdf

El Ghoul, S., Guedhami, O., Kwok, C. C., & Mishra, D. R. (2011). Does corporate social responsibility affect the cost of capital?. Journal of Banking & Finance, 35(9), 2388-2406

EU Law – Directives – Problem Question. (2016). https://www.academia.edu/5367000/EU_Law_-_Directives_-Problem_Question

Gao, F., Dong, Y., Ni, C. and Fu, R. (2015). Determinants and Economic Consequences of Non-financial Disclosure Quality. European Accounting Review, 25(2), pp.287-317.

Gee, P. (2006). UK GAAP for business practice. Amsterdam: Elsevier/CIMA.

ICAEW. (2021). Non financial reporting ensuring a sustainable global recovery. https://www.icaew.com/technical/financial-reporting/improving-corporate-reporting/non-financial-reporting-ensuring-a-sustainable-global-recovery

Johnson, G., Scholes, K., & Whittington, R. (2008). Exploring corporate strategy. Harlow: Prentice Hall

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.

McGuire, J., A. Sundgreen, & T. Schneeweis. (1998). Corporate social responsibility and firm financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 31(4), 854-72.

Rosen, B.N., D.M. Sandler, & D. Shani. (1991). Social issues and socially responsible investment behavior – a preliminary empirical investigation. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 25(2), 221-34.

Spector, D. (2012). 10 More Reasons Companies Should Care About Sustainability. http://www.businessinsider.com/the-top-10-benefits-of-convincing-your-company-to-careabout-sustainability-2012-3?IR=Ts