• Corporate social responsibility;
  • institutional investors;
  • Anglo-American corporate governance system


  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. References

This paper argues that key differences between the UK and the US in the importance ascribed to a company's social responsibilities (CSR) reflect differences in the corporate governance arrangements in these two countries. Specifically, we analyse the role of a salient type of owner in the UK and the US, institutional investors, in emphasising firm-level CSR actions. We explore differences between institutional investors in the UK and the US concerning CSR, and draw on a model of instrumental, relational and moral motives to explore why institutional investors in the UK are becoming concerned with firms’ social and environmental actions. We conclude with some suggestions for future research in this area.


  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. References
  • Aguilera, R. V. (2005) Corporate Governance and Director Accountability: An Institutional Comparative Perspective, British Journal of Management, 16, 115.
  • Aguilera, R. V. and Jackson, G. (2003) The Cross-national Diversity of Corporate Governance: Dimensions and Determinants, Academy of Management Review, 28, 447465.
  • Aguilera, R. V., Rupp, D., Williams, C. and Ganapathi, J. (forthcoming) Putting the S Back in CSR: A Multi-level Theory of Social Change in Organizations, Academy of Management Review.
  • Armour, J., Deakin, S. and Konzelmann, S. (2003) Shareholder Primacy and the Trajectory of UK Corporate Governance, British Journal of Industrial Relations, 41, 531555.
  • Aquino, K., Tripp, T. M. and Bies, R. J. (2001) How Employees Respond to Personal Offense: The Effects of Blame Attribution, Victim Status, and Offender Status on Revenge and Reconciliation in the Workplace, Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 5259.
  • Association of British Insurers (ABI) (2001) Disclosure Guidelines on Socially-responsible Investment ( (accessed November 20, 2005).
  • Bansal, P. and Roth, K. (2000) Why Companies Go Green: A Model of Ecological Responsiveness, Academy of Management Journal, 13, 717736.
  • Binay, M. (2005) Performance Attribution of US Institutional Investors, Financial Management, Summer, 127152.
  • Black, B. and Coffee, J. (1994) Hail Britannia: Institutional Investor Behavior under Limited Regulation, Michigan Law Review, 92, 19972087.
  • Cadbury Committee on the Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance (1992) Report with Code of Best Practice [Cadbury Report]. London: Gee Publishing.
  • Cheffins, B. (2000) Corporate Governance Reform: Britain as an Exporter, Hume Papers on Public Policy, 8, 1029.
  • Clark, G. and Hebb, T. (2004) Pension Fund Corporate Engagement, Industrial Relations (Quebec), 59, 142171.
  • Clark, G. and Hebb, T. (2005) Why Should They Care? The Role of Institutional Investors in the Market for Corporate Global Responsibility, Environment and Planning A, 37, 20152031.
  • Clark, G. and Wojcik, D. (2005) Path Dependence and Financial Markets: The Economic Geography of the German Model, 1997–2003, Environment and Planning A, 37, 17691791.
  • Combined Code on Corporate Governance (2003) Available at (accessed June 12, 2005).
  • Cropanzano, R., Byrne, Z. S., Bobocel, D. R. and Rupp, D. (2001) Moral Virtues, Fairness Heuristics, Social Entities, and Other Denizens of Organizational Justice, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58, 164209.
  • Cropanzano, R., Rupp, D. E., Mohler, C. J. and Schminke, M. (2001) Three roads to organizational justice. In J.Ferris (ed.) Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management, 1113. New York: JAI.
  • Cyert, R. M. and March, J. G. (1963) A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  • Federowicz, F. and Aguilera, R. V. (eds) (2003) Corporate Governance in a Changing Economic and Political Environment. Trajectories of Institutional Change on the European Continent. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (2005) A Legal Framework for the Integration of Environmental, Social and Governance Issues into Institutional Investment: A Report Produced for the Asset Management Working Group of the UNEP Finance Initiative ( (accessed November 25, 2005).
  • Gospel, H. and Pendleton, A. (2005) Corporate Governance and Labour Management: An International Comparison. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Hall, P. A. and Soskice, D. (2001) Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Hebb, T. and Wojcik, D. (2004) Global Standards and Emerging Markets: The Institutional Investment Value Chain and CALPERS’ Investment Strategy ( (accessed July 28, 2005).
  • Higgs, D. (2003) Review of the Role and Effectiveness of Non-Executive Directors ( (accessed June 12, 2005).
  • Holland, J. (1998) Influence and Intervention by Financial Institutions in their Investee Companies, Corporate Governance: An International Review, 6, 249264.
  • Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change (2003) Managing the Risks and Profiting from the Shift to a Lower Carbon Economy: IIGCC Conference Report 2003 ( (accessed June 11, 2005).
  • Institutional Shareholders’ Committee (ISC) (2002) The Responsibilities of Institutional Shareholders and Agents – Statement of Principles ( (accessed April 20, 2005).
  • Institutional Shareholders’ Committee (ISC) (2005) Review of the Institutional Shareholders’ Committee Statement of Principles on the Responsibilities of Institutional Shareholders and Agents ( (accessed November 20, 2005).
  • Jensen, M. (2005) Agency Costs of Overvalued Equity, Financial Management 519.
  • Jensen, M. and Meckling, W. (1976) Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure, Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305360.
  • Langevoort, D. (2001) The Human Nature of Corporate Boards: Law, Norms, and the Unintended Consequences of Independence and Accountability, Georgetown Law Journal, 89, 797832.
  • Mallin, C., Mullineux, A. and Wihlborg, C. (2005) The Financial Sector and Corporate Governance: The UK Case, Corporate Governance: An International Review, 13, 532541.
  • Miller, G. P. (2000) Takeovers: English and American, European Financial Management, 6, 533541.
    Direct Link:
  • Murphy, K. J. and Conyon, M. (2000) The Prince and the Pauper? CEO Pay in the United States and the United Kingdom, Economic Journal, 110, 640671.
  • Myners, P. (2001) Institutional Investment in the United Kingdom: A Review ( (accessed April 20, 2005).
  • New York Stock Exchange Listing Rule 303A (2003) available at (accessed April 20, 2005).
  • OECD (2003) Institutional Investors. Statistical Yearbook, 19922001. Paris: OECD.
  • Office for National Statistics (ONS) (2005) Share Ownership. A Report on Ownership of Shares as at 31st December 2004. London: ONS.
  • Pendleton, A. and Gospel, H. (2005) Market and relationships: finance, governance, and labour in the United Kingdom. In H.Gospel and A.Pendleton (eds) Corporate Governance and Labour Management: An International Comparison. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Regulation Full Disclosure (Reg. F-D), 17 C.F.R. § 243.100 (2005).
  • Romano, R. (2005) The Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the Making of Quack Corporate Governance, Yale Law Journal, 114, 15211611.
  • Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78(j)10A(m)(3) (2002).
  • Shleifer, A. and Vishny, R. (1997) A Survey of Corporate Governance, Journal of Finance, 2, 737783.
  • Solomon, A., Solomon, J. and Suto, M. (2004) Can the UK Experience Provide Lessons for the Evolution of SRI in Japan? Corporate Governance: An International Review, 12, 552566.
  • Streeck, W. and Yamamura, K. (2001) The Origins of Neoliberal Capitalism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
  • Toms, J. S. (2002) Firm Resources, Quality Signals and the Determinants of Corporate Environmental Reputation: Some UK Evidence, British Accounting Review, 34, 257282.
  • Toms, S. and Wright, M. (2005) Divergence and Convergence within Anglo-American Corporate Governance Systems: Evidence from the US and UK, 1950–2000, Business History, 47, 267295.
  • Williams, C. (2004) Civil Society Initiatives and “Soft Law” in the Oil and Gas Industry, New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, 36, 457502.
  • Williams, C. and Conley, J. (2005) An Emerging Third Way? The Erosion of the Anglo-American Shareholder Value Construct, Cornell International Law Journal, 38, 493551.