See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/335037760

Corporate financial performance due to sustainable development in Vietnam

Article in Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management · August 2019

DOI: 10.1002/csr.1836

CITATIONS READS

271 4,254

3 authors, including:

Nguyen Hoang Tien Nguyen Minh Ngoc

WSB Merito University University of Finance - Marketing
995 PUBLICATIONS 19,806 CITATIONS 144 PUBLICATIONS 3,029 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Nguyen Hoang Tien on 23 November 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Received: 26 February 2019 Revised: 1 July 2019 Accepted: 20 July 2019
DOI: 10.1002/csr.1836

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Corporate financial performance due to sustainable

development in Vietnam

Nguyen Hoang Tien1 | Dinh Ba Hung Anh2 | Nguyen Minh Ngoc3

1
Saigon International University, Ho Chi Minh
City, Vietnam Abstract
2
Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology, Social responsibility and environmental sustainability issues began to be paid atten-
Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
tion in Vietnam due to the impressive economic development in recent years. How-
3
University of Finance and Marketing, Ho Chi
Minh City, Vietnam
ever, corporate social responsibility (CSR) is still quite a new management concept,
especially for small and medium enterprises. Managers are facing multiple obstacles
Correspondence
Dr. Nguyen Hoang Tien, Saigon International
in executing CSR programs in accordance with international standards. Regarding
University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. corporate environmental sustainability (CES), the idea of sustainable development is
Email: vietnameu@gmail.com
a rising trend in today's business reality. Essentially, CSR is regarded as a part of
the overall sustainability issues. For the purpose of studying the impact of CSR and
CES on corporate financial performance (CFP), quantitative method has been used
to examine the relation between CSR and CFP. Qualitative method has been applied
to verify the relation between CSR, CES, and CFP. On the basis of findings, several
useful suggestions are made for managers to improve business performance and
sustainable development in Vietnam.

K E Y W OR D S

corporate environmental policy, corporate environmental sustainability, corporate financial

performance, corporate social responsibility, corporate sustainable development

JEL CLASSIFICATION
M16

1 | I N T RO D U CT I O N Hung Anh, 2018). CSR is a growing social and entrepreneurial phe-

Social responsibility is a field of research that investigates the
processes and solutions guaranteeing strategic equilibrium between
economic performance and social performance at both macroscopic
level (international, regional, national, and local) and microscopic level
(level of enterprises; Zdravkovic & Radukic, 2012; Placier, 2011;
Rajnoha & Lesníková, 2016). Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is
a field of research aiming at defining the essence of socially responsi-
ble business and exploring the benefits and the ways enterprises
become socially responsible, such as corporate ethical program, corpo-
rate governance, social policy, fair trading practice, socially responsible
plan of investment, and production (Tien, 2015). CSR is, more or less,
an integrated element in Western firms' structure and policy (Tien &
nomenon with broad implications for business practitioners, academic
scholars, and the society at large (Kot, 2014). Generally, CSR is a con-
tinuous commitment of the enterprises towards the idea of sustain-
able development by enhancing life quality of the recruited labor
force and local community and effective protection of the natural
resource and environment (Rajnoha & Lesníková, 2016).
World Commission on Environment and Development (1987)
defines sustainable development as a kind of development that meets
present needs without compromising the ability of future generations
to meet their own needs. Like CSR, the concepts and theories of sus-
tainable development have also been analyzed in many studies at both
macroscopic level and microscopic level. The idea of sustainable
development is very popular today as it sets common trend for all

Corp Soc Resp Env Ma. 2019;1–12. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/csr © 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment 1
2 TIEN
spheres of human and business activities, in all fields of research and
development, both academic and practical. At the microscopic level,
corporate sustainable development is viewed as new management
paradigm that recognizes corporate growth and profitability but
at the same time requires business to incorporate and pursue
nonprofitable, social goals, specifically relating to issues of sustainabil-
ity, such as environmental protection, social justice and equity, and
society and community development (Dudzevičiūtė, 2012).
Currently, CSR and corporate environmental sustainability (CES)1
are very popular management concepts worldwide that follow the
idea of corporate sustainable development. In developing countries,
they are new but fast growing in importance topics as companies
are beginning to be aware of the sustainability issues, to respect
CSR rules and regulations, and to conform to the environmentally
friendly behavioral standards due to the continually growing pressure
from foreign corporations entering and competing at home market.
Vietnamese enterprises have been so far identified as practicing social
responsibility and switching towards environmental sustainability in
an inadequate extent. Additionally, there are no many in‐depth aca-
demic studies carried out on the issues of CSR and CES in the local
context of Vietnam (Tien & Hung Anh, 2018). This article's goal
(research problem) is to study the relationship between CSR–CES
and corporate financial performance (CFP) and, as next, to propose
adequate solutions to enhance the CSR–CES performance to boost
the CFP. Both quantitative and qualitative methods have been used
in the analysis. The first‐stage quantitative analysis carried out on
the basis of the past data of financial statements of enterprises in
the research sample showed now evidence of relation between CSR
and CFP. However, the second‐stage qualitative analysis carried out
on the basis of primary data and information gathered from currently
conducted interviews with the same sample of enterprises has pointed
out to the strong and rising linkage between CSR–CES and CFP. As a
result, a set of suggestions and solutions has been put forward to build
a CSR–CES platform for a move towards trust‐based (relationship)
enterprises for gaining positive impacts on the CFP. In addition, the
article has laid a solid ground for further advanced studies in the field
of “Corporate social responsibility and environmental management,”
also the title of our respected journal.
2 | LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 | CSR and CES
In the literature of business and management, there are multiple defi-
nitions of CSR (Briš, Svoboda, & Brišová, 2013). It can be argued that
the sphere of influence of CSR is not confined within the enterprise
itself and no one could accurately define its border yet (Burianová &
Paulík, 2014). CSR has a great influence on many different parts of
society, especially in relation to the role of the government in the
economy in terms of planning policy and setting regulations (Carroll,
1
Or Corporate Environmental Management (CEM).
ET AL.
1999; Formankova, Hrdličková, Kučerová, & Skýpalová, 2017; Placier,
2011). Both large corporations and small companies have obligations
also to the society, which are above that of creating value for share-
holders. Corporations should be managed for the benefit of all stake-
holders (managers and owners, suppliers, employees, customers and
consumers, local communities and environment, etc.; Man & Macris,
2015). Consequently, the concept of CSR is constantly changing
depending on the spatial and temporal sphere of scientific and practi-
cal debate. In the context of globalization process, in developing coun-
tries, policy and regulations in this area are subjects of constant
changes and adaptations, spreading from financial model focusing on
profit only, preferred by opponents of the CSR concept, to societal
model of CSR focusing on people, planet, and profit, preferred by sup-
porters of the CSR concept (Briš et al., 2013; Tien & Hung Anh, 2018).
However, companies cannot claim neutrality in contexts where the
states and government exercise high levels of authority on the CSR
issues (Kemp & Owen, 2017). Kemp, Owen, and Vimala (2015) also
have shown some level of contradictoriness between social responsi-
bility and development in so‐called development‐oriented CSR basing
on the example of mining industry. Today, the definition from the
World Business Council for Sustainable Development (1998) on CSR
is widely used, which is considered complete and clear: “Corporate
social responsibility is a constant commitment of enterprises to busi-
ness ethics and to contribute to economic growth, while improving
the living quality of the workers and their families, as well as the local
community and society.”
In recent years, there have been significant discussions and
debates in both business and academic world about corporate sustain-
able development, a new management paradigm that recognizes the
importance of corporate growth and profitability. However, it also
requires corporations to pursue social goals, specifically those related
to sustainability issues, such as environmental protection, social justice
and equity, and local community development. Corporate sustainable
development consists in carrying out actions that improve the
economic growth and long‐term profitability of enterprises (Porter,
1985). Furthermore, sustainable enterprises should bear responsibili-
ties towards the environment that go beyond their economic ob-
ligations (Hart, 1995). Corporate sustainable development is a very
popular business strategy that attempts to meet the needs of stake-
holders without compromising resources and interests of the local
community and environment (Dyllick & Hockerts, 2002). Essentially,
corporate sustainable development consists of strictly interrelated
and mutually impacting concepts of CSR and CES (Figure 1).
All of the above‐mentioned concepts' definitions and understand-
ings were to suit the characteristics of the highly developed world.
However, it is also of great importance to point out to the scope
and agenda of CSR and CES issues in developing countries such as
most of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations states, apart from
its typical manifestation in highly developed economies. In a contrast
to developed countries, in developing countries, whether managers
with different attitudes and approaches are opted to operate in a
responsive or unresponsive manner towards CSR and CES issues, they
are exposed to uncertainty caused by policy and regulatory change
TIEN ET AL.
FIGURE 1 Corporate sustainable development [Colour figure can be
viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
(Marcus, 1981; Miliken, 1987; Wernerfelt & Karnani, 1987), particu-
larly in the time of economic recession and/or economic upturn
(Placier, 2011). Visser (2008) argued that developing countries feature
specific CSR and CES drivers due to the difference of local socioeco-
nomic, cultural, political, and legal settings where corporations operate
and establish their relations with stakeholders. Developing countries
specificities change the conditions, context, and circumstance in which
companies are facing business and social concerns (Muthuri & Gilbert,
2011). In developing countries, the CSR and CES issues do not follow
beaten track but are associated with specific theme or pattern.
Although the application of CSR and CES philosophy in business for
the purpose of sustainable development is becoming a popular trend
in developed countries, these issues are considered relatively new to
developing countries, particularly in case of Vietnam. In addition, the
CSR and CES studies conducted in Vietnam remain very scarce. More-
over, there was almost no impactful research conducted in Vietnam
that relates to the relationship between CSR, CES, and CFP.
2.2 | Corporate financial performance
The concept of sustainable development deals with protecting and
sustaining society and environment for the sake of future generations
while trying to meet the maximization of market capitalization objec-
tive. Despite the increased awareness of corporate sustainable devel-
opment, questions remain on how to measure the corporate business
performance due to sustainable development, especially the CFP. As
an example, Küçükbay and Sürücü (2019) proposed a new method
for corporate business performance measurement, which incorporates
four economic and financial subcriteria, two environmental subcriteria,
and four social subcriteria. In this section, we are narrowing down to
the financial aspect of corporate business performance presented by
special system/set of indicators. In the financial literature, there are
many indicators that measure CFP, but the most commonly used indi-
cators in research studies can be divided into two following main cat-
egories: (a) short‐term indicator related with accounting value ratios
and coefficient of profitability and (b) long‐term indicator related with
market value factors, also known as asset growth factors. The most
commonly used profit targets are return on assets (ROA) and return
on equity (ROE). To calculate these two indices, simply net profit
(before or after tax) could be used (Tian & Estrin, 2008). However,
researchers have suggested that pre‐tax profit after interest (earnings
3
before interest and taxes) or after interest, depreciation, and amortiza-
tion (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization)
should be in use instead. This choice will lead to different financial
implications. The reason for such different methods of profit calcula-
tions may be due to the database constraints. In many cases, the
incompleteness of the database will cause some studies to carry out
different calculations. The ROA and ROE are effective indicators for
assessing current CFP as they reflect the level of profitability that
the firm has achieved in past accounting periods. When it comes to
the future market value, Marris and Tobin's Q coefficients are very
popular as good instruments for assessing long‐term CFP. The initial
factor is the total market value of equity relative to the book value
of equity, and the latter factor is calculated as the market value of
equity plus the book value of debts payable against the book value
of total assets. The Marris and Tobin's Q ratios can indicate the future
CFP because they reflect the market's assessment of the potential
profitability expressed by the stock market price.
2.3 | Corporate sustainable development and CFP
For decades, there have been multiple debates about the relation
between corporate social/environmental performance and CFP. Espe-
cially, the last three decades have witnessed a huge amount of
research exploring the linkage between CSR, corporate sustainable
development, social responsibility and sustainability disclosure, and
CFP. So far, researchers have applied various methods and developed
many theoretical backgrounds to investigate this relationship. Never-
theless, the obtained results remain equivocal. Two mainstream theo-
ries that have laid solid background for research studies in the field of
CSR and corporate sustainable development are the agency theory
and the stakeholder theory. The agency theory is used to explain the
asymmetric information problem between the owners and the man-
agers of an enterprise. As such, it quickly became a disposition for
researches on the issues of CSR, corporate sustainable development,
and corporate governance. The agency theory applies to matters relat-
ing to the representation contract between them. Therefore, when the
enterprise develops its social responsibility and environmental sustain-
ability orientation, it must be placed in the balance between the repre-
sentative's interests and the interests of the owners. The CSR
expenditures are not a form of corporate charity, but they also serve
to improve future financial performance. Firms rather undertake CSR
expenditures in the current period when they anticipate long‐term
sustainable financial performance (Eisenhardt, 1989; Hill & Jones,
1992). According to American, European, and Japanese business man-
agers, the future belongs to those who create dynamic and integrated
organization that is capable to achieve specific effects and at the same
time capable of being both socially responsible and environmentally
sustainable (Mizera, 2008). In addition to influencing the decision from
the CEO level, the stakeholder theory explains more clearly the corpo-
rate goal of achieving the ability to balance the conflict of interest
between different stakeholders. The stakeholder theory has in many
ways become an inseparable companion of the concept of CSR and
4 TIEN
the wider concept of corporate sustainable development (Donalson &
Preston, 1995; Hill & Jones, 1992).
CSR is starting to receive a supreme interest, especially from
developing nations. Experts have revealed the outcomes of CSR dis-
closure towards organizational performance across the globe, includ-
ing the aspect of marketing and sales that indirectly contribute to
the CFP. The comprehensive analysis carried out by Waheed and Yang
(2019) on 450 small and medium enterprises (SMEs) from Pakistan
unveiled the significantly higher effect of external CSR disclosure than
internal CSR disclosure on marketing and sales performance.
Brogi and Lagasio (2019) investigated the association between
environmental, social, and governance (ESG) disclosure and company
profitability, as measured by ROA on a large sample of US listed
companies based on MSCI ESG KLD STATS data from 2000 to
2016. Significant differences between industrial firms and financial
intermediaries have emerged.
Zhu, Zou, and Zhang (2019) on a sample of 494 Chinese SMEs
have developed a conceptual model to explore if the three types of
innovation (technology, management, and marketing) have moderation
and mediation effects on relationships between CSR practices and
corporate business performance. The results show that technology
and management innovation can improve environmental performance,
social image, and community involvement, whereas marketing innova-
tion is necessary to gain economic momentum and CFP.
Although many extant studies focus on the relation between CFP
and CSR reporting, less attention has been given to the shifting role
of financial performance in CSR reporting in a changing institutional
environment. Sun, Zhao, and Cho (2019) have investigate whether,
why, and how institutional transitions affect the role of financial
performance in CSR reporting in terms of firms' propensity to issue
standalone CSR reports, the quality of voluntary CSR reports, and
the quality of mandatory CSR reports. Authors found that CFP buffers
against external pressures brought by institutional transitions rather
than only serving as a slack resource.
Hou (2019) examined the relationship between CSR and CFP in
Taiwan. The study found that socially responsible firms can achieve
financial results superior to those of firms that do not pursue CSR
initiatives. For the nonelectronics industries, the results revealed that
board ownership has a significant positive influence on the CSR–
CFP relationship and a negative relationship if it is a family business.
Hussain, Rigoni, and Cavezzali (2018) have considered various
manifestations of sustainability practices and investigated their link
with CFP. Authors analyzed the sustainability reports of the 100
best performing U.S. firms and revealed that fragmentation in the
results obtained is caused by the ways of sustainability performance
measurement as the interlinks between different sustainability per-
formance dimensions and subdimensions are weak and somewhat
contradictory.
Lu, Ye, and Chau (2018) carried out a research to substantiate the
hypothesis of a paradoxical dynamic link between CSR and its material
implications including CFP. By analyzing a panel of 67 international
construction companies from 2006 to 2015, authors found that CSR
programs can be detrimental to CFP in the short term but conducive
ET AL.
to improving it in the long term. The findings of this research indicate
that, in the international construction business, the impact of CSR on
CFP is not immediate and unchanging, and it takes time to materialize
CSR for sustainable development.
The results of study presented by Busch and Friede (2018) demon-
strate a highly significant, positive, robust, and bilateral relation
between corporate social performance (CSP) and CFP. The relation is
positive regardless of whether firms focus on ecological or social
aspects, though corporate reputation turns out to be a key CSP determi-
nant. Authors found a particularly strong CSP–CFP relation for opera-
tional, short‐term CFP. Furthermore, potential biases resulting from
methodological weakness do not distort the positive CSP–CFP relation.
Marti, Rosa, Lisa, and Drescher (2015) have analyzed the effect
exerted by corporate social strategies on (short term and long term)
CFP of firms listed in the Stoxx Europe 600 Index and Stoxx Europe
Sustainability Index from 2007 to 2010. The results obtained show
that the implementation of CSR strategy, the level of national eco-
nomic development, and the firm size determine CFP. In addition,
the investment in research and development influences the ROA,
whereas the company's financial slack affects the Tobin's Q. So com-
panies that contribute to sustainable development incur higher CFP.
Finally, study carried out by Herremans (1993) shows that large US
manufacturing companies with better reputations for social responsi-
bility and sustainability image outperformed other companies with
poorer reputations and image in the period 1982‐1987, and provided
investors better stock market returns at lower risk. Table 1 below has
summarized the above presented researches carried out on CSR/CES‐
CFP relations.
3 | M E TH OD O LO GY
This study uses the archival methodology to summarize published
research articles in the world over issues of relation between CSR,
CES, and CFP. In addition, this study uses the interpretive methodol-
ogy to analyze, evaluate, and compare mainstream background theo-
ries and obtained results of the researches conducted in the past. In
our original research study, we use the quantitative method to test
the relationship between CSR and CFP of a selected sample of enter-
prises within food and beverage industry in Vietnam. The issues of
CSR, CFP, and their measurement and interrelations are strongly
investigated abroad but need some adaptive changes in terms of both
content and form to fit in the current local cultural and socioeconomic
context and political and legal settings. The secondary data were col-
lected from financial reports of 30 companies throughout the histori-
cal period of 2013–2015. CSR is a multidimensional concept that is
often measured using diverse indicators. However, composite indices
can aggregate single indicators into one measurement. In advanced
research studies, the model that reflects the impact of CSR on CFP is
measured by stock market indicators (Marris and Tobin's Q), indicators
of accounting (ROE and ROA), and control variables including S (size
of the firm) and L (the financial lever). In this research study, from share-
holders' point of view in developing countries, the most important ratio
TIEN ET AL. 5

TABLE 1 Summary of researches carried out on CSR/CES–CFP relation

Author(s) and
year of study Research scope Research results

Brogi and Association between environmental, social, and Significant differences between industrial firms and financial intermediaries
Lagasio governance disclosure and company profitability
(2019) measured by ROA
Zhu et al. Innovation has moderation and mediation effects on Technology and management innovation improve social and environmental
(2019) relationships between CSR practices and CFP performance. Marketing innovation is necessary to gain economic
momentum and CFP
Sun et al. Institutional transitions affect the role of financial CFP buffers against external pressures on CSR brought by institutional
(2019) performance in CSR reporting transitions
Hou (2019) Relationship between CSR and CFP in Taiwan Socially responsible firms can achieve financial performance superior to
those which do not pursue CSR initiatives
Hussain et al. Link between sustainability practices and CFP Interlinks between different sustainability performance dimensions and
(2018) subdimensions are weak and somewhat contradictory to bias and
fragment research results
Lu et al. Link between CSR and its material implications including CSR programs can be detrimental to CFP in the short term but conducive to
(2018) CFP improving it in the long term
Busch and Relation between CSP and CFP The relation is positive regardless of whether firms focus on ecological or
Friede social aspects. Strong relation for operational, short‐term CFP
(2018)
Marti et al. Effect exerted by corporate social strategies on short‐term Companies that contribute to sustainable development incur higher CFP.
(2015) and long‐term CFP CSR strategy, the level of national economic development, and firm size
determine CFP
Herremans Social/sustainable performance and general business Companies with better reputations for social responsibility and sustainability
(1993) performance of U.S. manufacturing firms image outperformed other companies

Source: Own development.

Abbreviations: CES, corporate environmental sustainability; CFP, corporate financial performance; CSP, corporate social performance; CSR, corporate social
responsibility; ROA, return on assets.

is the ROE that will represent CFP. This ROE ratio is designed to mea-
TABLE 2 Variables description
sure the company's profitability per share. The ROE rate is the best
measure of a company's ability to maximize profits from each of its Variable Description Measurement
capital investments. The mentioned control variables (S and L) have Dependent variable
been widely employed in empirical studies to deal with the association ROE Return on equity Ratio between the net income
between CSR and CFP. So we have the specification of following econo- (invested capital) and the equity
metric equation (and its variables explanation is presented in Table 2): Explanatory variable
CSR Corporate social 1—if the label issued by the sustainable
ROEit ¼ α0 þ α1 *CSRit þ γ2 *Sit þ γ3 *Lit þ εit : responsibility development report is hold; 0—if not
Control variable
The literature review reveals a lack of attention and interest in
S Size of the firm Total assets
explaining conceptual foundations, focusing instead on descriptions
L Financial lever Ratio between the debts and the
of CSR and CES issues and practices in developing countries (Arya & own capital
Bassi, 2009; Chapple & Moon, 2005; Eweje, 2006; Ite, 2004; Wiig &
Source: Authors'.
Kolstad, 2010). This trend to understand what companies in develop-
ing countries are doing for the sake of social responsibility and to
preserve the environmental sustainability is related to the type of vast preference for qualitative research methods indicates many
methodology that most papers used. Case studies and interviews with existing obstacles and difficulties encountered in the process of
surveys are used to find the answers to the “why” and “how” ques- conducting empirical research (collecting and processing exact data)
tions as well as to offset the lack of previous findings in the literature in developing countries (Husted & Allen, 2006; Jamali & Mirshak,
(Rubin & Rubin, 2005; Yin, 2009). Thus, the preference and prevailing 2007). This is also true in our case. In the first‐stage quantitative
type of research design for these studies suggests that those are the research, we were facing a lack of access to the necessary data to con-
first steps taken to understand the driving motivations underlying duct our study in a full scale. We are able only to collect data related
CSR and CES issues and practices in developing countries. The general to the ROE (one of short‐term indicators of financial performance) of
6 TIEN ET AL.

selected enterprises. This is really the most important constraint of our consideration and in practical implementation. Thus, the understand-
quantitative research framework that leads to the need of supplement ing, the adaptation, and the so far achievement of CSR implementa-
with qualitative analysis to reexamine the obtained disputable find- tion are still limited. The barriers and challenges for the effective
ings. In the second stage of our research, we applied the case study‐ implementation of CSR in Vietnam's sociobusiness context and condi-
based and interview‐based qualitative method to examine the relation tion include the following things: limited awareness and understanding
between CSR, CES, and the CFP. We have conducted in‐depth inter- of CSR ideas, concepts, and issues by business; lack of resources to
views with the members of boards of directors of all firms selected implement CSR standards in small and medium enterprises; CSR issues
in our research sample but 5 years after the finish of the first‐stage are bound and regulated chiefly by management practices and stan-
quantitative analysis. Interviews are provided to examine their percep- dards such as SA8000, WRAP, ISO 14000, and GRI, but they are far
tion of the business reality and pioneering trends in the fast‐changing from enough for enterprises growing and reaching out to the world;
socioeconomic landscape and conditions for conducting sustain- and evidently manifested lack of ethics social and environmental
able business in Vietnam, test their attitudes and approaches towards responsibility in both business philosophy and culture and in both pro-
social responsibility and sustainable environmental management duction and operation activities of enterprises.
issues and concerns, and relate that to the achieved CFP. The obtained CSR is of great importance for enterprises from both highly devel-
research results of the second‐stage qualitative analysis are to supple- oped and developing countries. Developing countries are those being
ment and to reinterpret the disputable findings of the early carried out in a period of economic transition from centrally planned system to
first‐stage quantitative analysis. fully market‐based system in order to integrate with the global econ-
omy. For those countries, all the issues related to modern manage-
ment and conducting business in accordance with market mechanism
4 | RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION are still of inadequate interest in both theoretical research and practi-
cal application, of course, including the CSR. So far, in developing
In Table 3, we present the summary of data collected for the above‐ countries, the issues related with CSR standards and regulations are
mentioned analyzed companies. Fixed‐effects model and random‐ less paid attention and less appreciated, at least in the initial stage of
effects model are used to estimate the panel data. The research results the economic transition period. In emerging markets, there are
were estimated by these two models. If the result shows that there is reigning perceptions that profit, instead of being a means, still is seen
statistical significance and relevance between CSR and CFP, the better as a supergoal for all business activities, and only enterprises from
model will be chosen. wealthy countries may follow noble ethical standards (Kopycinska,
The results are shown in Tables 4 and 5. The summarized results 2001). It is true that only the highly developed countries that had been
from Tables 4 and 5 show that the independent variable CSR is not cor- through many decades of capital accumulation, with matured and
related with the dependent variable ROE in the random‐effects GLS transparent market mechanism, may afford to build and operate a
regression model (P > [z] = .762 > .05) and in the fixed‐effects regres- so‐called moral‐based economy. That is why, compared with the
sion model (P > = .553 > .05). In other words, there is no statistical highly developed capitalist countries, those economies are in the stage
significance and relevance between CSR and CFP in terms of ROE. of the 60s and 70s of XX century, taking into account the level of
As the above presented first‐stage secondary and historical data‐ awareness and consciousness of the CSR issues as well as the capacity
based quantitative test results show, there is no correlation between of enterprises to execute their social obligations. Their understanding
CSR and CFP in terms of ROE. This result is consistent with the cur- and perception of CSR issues primarily have a push character that is
rent state of adoption of CSR ideas, concepts, and implementation, strictly related with carrying out all obligations imposed by the law
which are still considered relatively novel for developing and under- and required by the market with quite passive and reluctant attitude,
developed countries, especially in the case of Vietnam. In reality, treating social responsibility as things that mandatorily must be done
CSR and related issues are quite new in Vietnam, both in theoretical (Tien, Thao, & Hung Anh, 2019). In particular cases, if the resources
are available, some of them will actively contribute to solving the
social problems that are within their scope of capability (pull character
TABLE 3 Summary of the data collected
of CSR in contrary to push character). Almost all enterprises in devel-
Variable Obs Mean SD Min Max
oping countries are of a microscale (small and medium enterprises).
Code 0 They suffer from a serious lack of capital, together with inadequate
Age 0 24.93333 13.4989 8 63 management capacity and weak economic potential. It is not difficult
Year_obs 90 2014 0.8210708 2013 2015 to remark on the correlation between the level of CSR awareness
and the size of enterprises as well as the correlation between CSR
ROE 90 0.1029456 0.4736007 −3.674 1.4148
awareness and the level of national prosperity (Filek, 1996). Highly
S 90 1.692032 2.206606 0.1548 16.6705
developed and wealthy nations often apply more sophisticated CSR
L 90 1.692032 2.206606 0.1548 16.6705
and ethical standards towards enterprises and expect from them
CSR 90 1.188889 0.3936132 1 2
much higher level of awareness and commitment. Furthermore, the
Source: Duc, Yen, Thuy, and Tien (2018). scale of capital engaged and the professionalism in terms of skills
TIEN ET AL. 7

TABLE 4 Random‐effects GLS regression results

Random‐effects GLS regression Number of obs = 90

Group variable: macty1 Number of groups = 30

R2: within = 0.6091, between = 0.6379, and overall = 0.5080 obs per group: min = 3, avg = 3.0, and max = 3
corr(u_i, x) = 0 (assumed) Wald χ2(4) = 87.06
P > χ2 = .0000
ROE Coef. SE z P > [z] 95% confidence interval
CSR −0.0325728 0.1073922 −0.30 .762 [−0.2430576, 0.1779119]
S −0.0288483 0.0231473 −1.25 .213 [−0.0742162, 0.0165196]
L −0.1658886 0.0180249 −9.20 .000 [−0.2012168, −0.1305603]
Age −0.0038294 0.0028671 −1.34 .182 [−0.0094488, 0.00179]
_cons 1.302651 0.6090064 2.14 .032 [0.1090209, 2.496282]
sigma_u 0.07125273
sigma_e 0.27746426
ρ 0.06186624 (fraction of variance due to u_i)

Source: Duc et al. (2018).

Abbreviation: GLS, generalized least square.

TABLE 5 Fixed‐effects regression results

Fixed‐effects (within) regression Number of obs = 90

Group variable: macty1 Number of groups = 30

R2: within = 0.6797, between = 0.0117, and overall = 0.0326 obs per group: min = 3, avg = 3.0, and max = 3
F (4, 56) = 29.71
corr(u_i, Xb) = ‐0.9729 P > F = .0000
Coef. SE t P> 95% confidence interval
CSR −0.1230248 0.206246 −0.60 .553 [−0.5361852, 0.2901355]
S −0.1569672 0.0982693 −1.60 .116 [−0.3538242, 0.0398898]
L −0.2865879 0.0283035 −10.13 .000 [−0.3432866, −0.2298891]
Age 0.122275 0.0376828 3.24 .002 [0.0467872, 0.1977628]
_cons 1.955662 2.678486 0.73 .468 [−3.409989, 7.321314]
sigma_u 1.7943693
sigma_e 0.27746426
ρ 0.97664777 (fraction of variance due to u_i)
F test that all u_i = 0: F (29, 56) = 2.57, P > F = .0012

Source: Duc et al. (2018).

and competencies of workers and management staff are absolutely
incomparable with those of enterprises in developing countries (Ho,
Wang, Dac, & Vitell, 2019).
The results of many investigations carried out by research centers
on the issues of CSR in different parts of the world had proved the
truth of the above‐mentioned facts. Those researches are carried out
simultaneously in both developed and developing countries. The find-
ings indicated that enterprises in developing countries often attach
great importance to profit and put the economic criteria and indicators
above social and ethical norms in their development strategy as well
as in their corporate values system (Klimek, 2012; Kopycinska,
2001). More seriously, most of SMEs in developing countries conduct
regularly opportunistic behaviors in their business activities, with their
business operations executed in self‐interested manner in order to
attain quick profit only. Partly and perhaps, this is due to the legal sta-
tus of CSR, which is not strict and severe enough, and the CSR
macropolicy and measures, which are in most cases not strongly bind-
ing enough to punish and deter enterprises from irresponsible and
unsustainable behavior. The findings of many researches indicated
that enterprises in developing countries have been putting profit‐
related criteria very high in their system of corporate goals (Lewicka,
1999). Stunning economic growth and looking for profit as quickly as
possible and at any cost, especially when the market economy was still
in a stage of conception with less competitive pressure and unstable
legal system, are the main factors behind. Profit is an overriding,
privileged goal to be positioned higher than social responsibility and
8 TIEN ET AL.

other noneconomic activities in order to catch up with the pace of
growth of enterprises in developed countries. However, the findings
of researches and the above‐mentioned perceptions are decreasingly
convincing as developing economies are approximating developed
economies in terms of understanding the importance of CSR, ethical
standards, and the rules of the law, once the world is globalized and
differences between regions are fading away. When all the domestic,
regional, and international market become a common playground
equally for all players due to ongoing process of global integration, the
CSR, sustainability, and ethical issues will become effective means of
competition for potential customers, partners, suppliers, human, and
other resources serving the further development of enterprises.
The second‐stage interview‐based qualitative investigation carried
out 5 years after (2018–2019) has been served to gather and process
the current, more exact primary data and information on CSR and
sustainable environmental management issues and concerns, which
are important for the top managers and the board of directors of the
same sample of enterprises selected during the first‐stage quantitative
research. The increasing importance of CSR and CES issues and their
impact on CFP is due to the rising role of enterprises in the society
and serious consequences they have been causing to the environment,
the urgent need to find out effective and sustainable solutions to deal
with them. CSR and CES issues are top priority for enterprises operat-
ing on the basis of market mechanism. Enterprises are special subjects
of interest of CSR and CES policies and regulations due to their
ambidexterity, conflictual nature, ambiguous, and multipolar mission:
to improve and to supplement useful values to the society and to bring
about profit for shareholders understood in terms of CFP (Sulphey &
Alkahthani, 2017). In countries being in transitional period, the role
of business, especially private enterprises, is vital as driving force for
economic development. Thus, their awareness and right perception
of CSR and CES issues for the local community and the surrounding
environment are really important, and as such, they need to be
highlighted correspondingly. Private enterprises will have to compete
with foreign ones on an equal basis at home and globally. Understand-
ing and dealing properly with the sensitive CSR and CES issues and
concerns will become a core competitive means and advantage for
the enterprises to assure CFP in a long term (Tien et al., 2019). CSR
and CES issues are related not only to the CFP for the large enter-
prises but also to the CFP for the SMEs. Small enterprises, limited in
power, resources, and capability, contribute a humble part to the
society and local community. Social responsibility and environmen-
tal sustainability are common concerns of all organizations as constitu-
tive components of the society, regardless of size and nature (Klimek,
2012; Langenecker & Moore, 1991). When the size and resources
of enterprises are growing, their capacity to carry out social res-
ponsibility and contribute to the environmental sustainability is to be
proportional. SMEs are just seeds, the source of social expectations
to become socially responsible and environmentally sustainable corpo-
rations actively contributing to the sustainable development of the

TABLE 6 Soft controlling and regulating instruments

Instruments Explanation

Well‐grounded ethical standards and
norms
Comprehensive communication and
understanding
Fundamental business culture and
common system of values
Corporate sustainable leadership
Based on ethical standards and norms, attitudes, and behaviors in dealing with business situations,
processing transactions, and solving problems, such as disputes and conflicts resolution become friendly
and understandable, effectively boosting mutual and multilateral cooperation, enhancing enlisted and
consolidated trust and respect of the comprehensive partners and the whole community
Communication and understanding help promote strategic orientations related to business ethics and CSR
and CES issues and concerns. Communication conveys important messages within and to outside
partners in the society while facilitating smooth cooperation with other enterprises and taking advantage
of governmental support
Both business culture and common value system are related strictly with social responsibility and
prerequisite of environmental sustainability. They are to self‐consolidate over time to lay ground for
enterprise to overcome never‐ending conflicts, disputes, and difficult situations and establish trust and
credibility in the local community and the society at large. The common system of values is to be
consulted and shared as fundamentals forming individual values and serves as an integrating driver to
further build and enhance social trust, credibility, and reputation, reducing conflict of interest and
tensions for the purpose of sustainable development in a very complex and constantly changing business
environment
Corporate sustainable leadership is strictly related with CSR and CES issues as the leaders have a great role
and immense impact on the corporate sustainable business strategy (Piotrkowski, 2001). Enterprises
should adapt to new requirements, new rules, and new standards to solve newly emerged CSR and CES
issues. Corporate sustainable leadership should fulfill equally all the expectations of stakeholders, putting
issues of sustainable development above own interests and goals. This is a great challenge for sustainable
business leaders in developing countries who used to think locally instead of globally as they do not have
adequate experiences and exposures to act consistently and in line with changing global sustainability
issues. High sense of social responsibility and environmental sustainability will secure social trust, the
core of indisputable sustainable advantage, and intangible and priceless asset leading to better financial
performance in a long run

Source: Tien et al. (2019).

Abbreviations: CES, corporate environmental sustainability; CSR, corporate social responsibility.
TIEN ET AL.
local community in the future. SMEs should be well educated and
informed to be and strongly aware in terms of social responsibility
and environmental sustainability issues at the earliest stage of devel-
opment in order to become future socially responsible, environmen-
tally sustainable, and financially resilient flagships of the society and
economy. The interview‐based qualitative analysis and investigation
leads us to the following facts that point out to the relations between
CSR, CES, and CFP and the ways of their strengthening.
First, due to dualism and ambidexterity of CSR and CES issues, for
the purpose of parallel corporate sustainable development and sus-
tainable financial performance, managers should enhance both the
individual responsibility (staff members and managers themselves)
towards the enterprise and the corporate responsibility towards the
society and environment. In order to boost the CSR and CES of enter-
prise, each staff member should act in a responsible way and be aware
that they are seeds contributing to the image, reputation, and active
role of enterprise in the community. Low labor productivity in devel-
oping countries compared with that in developed the world stems
from the low sense of responsibility and weak discipline at work and
that situation has not changed for a long time. It is urgent to assure
professionally qualified staff members in order to carry out their task
efficiently and attentively by training them on the issues of CSR,
CES, and professional ethical standards (code of conducts and right
attitudes and behaviors required at workplace) in order to perform
their jobs accordingly. That will lead to the better business perfor-
mance in general and better CFP in particular.
Second, to enhance the CSR and CES spirit of enterprise in a pursuit
of strong CFP, mutual and multilateral social trust should be preserved
and consolidated. Enterprise is also a tiny society in a large society. For
the purpose of sustainable development that is to become both socially
responsible and orient towards environmental sustainability, before
being entrusted with important social missions, enterprise has to be
trustworthy for internal staff and credible for external partners. In order
to attain this goal, enterprises should deliver dialogs and conduct inter-
active, open debates at all levels and consolidate mutual trust and
understanding by continuously searching for new compromises and
consensus. Otherwise, the cost to run a business, such as processing
transactions, internal and external control, will be too much to be paid.
That will certainly badly impact the CFP of the enterprises in both short
term and long term. In developing economies, in order to progress
towards the model of so‐called moral‐ or trust‐based enterprises that
will significantly reduce all transactional costs and improve the CFP,
managers should deploy the four important soft controlling and regulat-
ing instruments (presented in the Table 6): well‐grounded ethical
standards and norms, comprehensive communication and understand-
ing, fundamental business culture and common system of values, and
corporate sustainable leadership.
5 | C O N CL U S I O N S
Rising attention on the issues of CSR and CES is not only a character-
istic feature of developed economies. This is also specific feature of
9
emerging economies being in a period of transition into effective mar-
ket economy. The bottom line is their capacity to selectively and
appropriately apply the experiences of countries with long‐standing
market economy and developed society. Diverse experiences in
boosting effectiveness of CSR and CES platform may be a starting
point for emerging countries to establish their own platforms. Pro-
found understanding of CSR and CES concepts and contents by man-
agers becomes urgent in a globally interconnected and integrated
economy. Enterprises in developing countries, in order to catch up
with the pace of business and trends of global economy, should
change their mindset in addition to the changing business model from
traditional development towards sustainable development where CSR,
CES issues, professional business ethics, mutual understanding, trust,
and respect are the main pillars and development drivers of a so‐called
moral economy or a trust‐based economy.
CSR and CES are still a hotly debatable topic on the relationship
and impact of sustainable development orientation on business. There
are already many studies in the world devoted to CSR, CES, and their
sustainable business impact, including impact on CFP. These studies
were presented in the above literature overview. In our multistage
research process carried out in different periods of time but based
on the same sample of enterprises, the first‐stage quantitative analysis
has reject any relation between CSR and CFP. The second‐stage qual-
itative investigation has pointed out to the fact that CSR, or broadly,
corporate sustainable development (including CSR and CES), and
CFP are in certain positively correlative relationship, and this fact
should be further investigated, both profoundly and extensively,
regarding Vietnam's quite stable institutional and political settings
but quickly transforming legal, social, and business condition, context,
and landscape in order to achieve interesting findings.
Apart from previous studies conducted abroad and in Vietnam, this
article has investigated the CSR and CES issues and their relation with
CFP in multiple period of the quickly transforming business landscape
of Vietnam economy. This article has contributed a research frame-
work for investigating the issues of CSR and CES related to the CFP,
including background theory (stakeholder theory and agency theory),
literature reviews (overview of previous studies conducted on the
CSR–CES and CFP relation), and methodology (both quantitative and
qualitative). The research results may be useful for state agencies
and policy makers, management researchers, and business practi-
tioners so that they can introduce research results into practice and
conduct similar research in the future. Additionally, the article delves
deeply into the two interrelated concepts, CSR and CES, which are
the main pillars of very popular today overall and overarching concept
of corporate sustainable development. The article also signaled that
the latter concept of corporate sustainable development represents
a new business philosophy that reflect current but more comprehen-
sive understanding of CSR, including much more topical dimensions
interested by today's management researchers and business practi-
tioners, as well as state agencies and policy makers across the globe.
Thus, the future similar research studies should be carried out to reex-
amine the relationship between the corporate sustainable develop-
ment (including both CSR and CES dimensions) and the corporate
10
economic performance. Importantly, the achievements as the outcome
of corporate business processes related to social responsibility and
environmental sustainability issues should be understood not only in
terms of financial performance but also in terms of socioeconomic
performance to reflect the broader scope and true sense of the
expected corporate business performance.
5.1 | Implication
This article has contributed to the fast‐changing concept of CSR and
the overarching sustainable development philosophy and practices in
developing countries and in today's global business. There are different
definitions and understandings of CSR concept and practice. Each orga-
nization, company, and government recognizes and sees CSR from its
own perspective and lens, depending on the conditions, characteristics,
and landscape of national socioeconomic development. Organizations
that want to survive in the market and achieve strong CFP in a long
run must adopt strategy embracing economic, social, and ecological
dimension in a sustainable way. To achieve adequate level of corporate
sustainable development, it is necessary to apply business strategies
that meet all parties' (stakeholders') needs while protecting, strengthen-
ing, and enhancing the human and natural resources for the need of use
in the future (Bakanauskiene, Staniuliene, & Zirgutis, 2016). For busi-
ness activities to be efficient, effective, and economically valuable, at
the same time both socially responsible and environmentally sustain-
able, this strategy should result from social multiaspect dialogs, negoti-
ations, and consensus with all interested parties (Mizera, 2008).
In addition to theoretical implications, this article also provides prac-
tical implication for management researchers, business practitioners,
and authority's representatives as well. The research results show that
the understanding CSR and CES issues and practices is still insufficient,
and the awareness of business and political leaders on those issues and
practices is now of great importance for all enterprises, the whole
economy, and the society at large to perish or prosper. Many empirical
evidences have proven that there is indeed strongly positive correlation
between CSR, CES, and CFP in the world, and firms in Vietnam are not
out of this global trend and direction as are reflected in our multistage
analysis. Due to that strongly positive correlation, in addition to the sec-
ond stage of this multistage analysis, a set of soft controlling and regu-
lating instruments is proposed to transform enterprises into moral‐ or
trust‐based businesses to benefit (and profit) from streamlining opera-
tions and reducing transaction costs to boost their CFP.
5.2 | Limitation and recommendation
Despite important theoretical and empirical contributions, this article
still faces some limitations that need to be eliminated in the future
studies. First, in our first‐stage quantitative analysis, for the purpose
of simplification, the CFP is identified by ROE (accounting value
ratios and short‐term coefficient of profitability), the dependent vari-
able in the model. Further researches on this topic need to consider
other indicators such as ROA and long‐term financial performance
TIEN ET AL.
indicators, which relate to the market value and future potential asset
growth. Second, further studies should also extend the research
objects group into samples of companies from different industries, of
different origins (foreign vs. domestic), in order to compare their CFP
due to the implementation of CSR–CES standards and practices, based
on that to draw multiple interesting and meaningful conclusions. Third,
the extension of understanding of the output of the corporate man-
agement process from traditional CFP to the overarching corporate
business performance has been pointed out in previous researches
and signaled in the above part of this section. This is also necessary
in further researches to be strongly in line with the current trend of
sustainable strategic management that needs to adopt more sophisti-
cated indicators and metrics and prefers nonfinancial ones to measure
business performance rather than solely financial performance.
ORCID
Nguyen Hoang Tien https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6205-0666
RE FE RE NC ES
Arya, B., & Bassi, B. (2009). Corporate social responsibility and broad‐
based black economic empowerment legislation in South Africa: Codes
of good practice. Business and Society., 50(4), 674–695.
Bakanauskiene, I., Staniuliene, S., & Zirgutis, V. (2016). Corporate social
responsibility: The context of stakeholders pressure in Lithuania. Polish
Journal of Management Studies, 13(1), 18–29. https://doi.org/10.
17512/pjms.2016.13.1.02
Briš, P., Svoboda, J., & Brišová, H. (2013). The growing importance of the
practical application of corporate social responsibility in the manage-
ment of companies in the Czech Republic. Journal of Competitiveness,
2(June 2013), 124–138.
Brogi, M., & Lagasio, V. (2019). Environmental, social, and governance and
company profitability: Are financial intermediaries different? Journal of
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(3),
576–587. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1704
Burianová, L., & Paulík, J. (2014). Corporate social responsibility in commer-
cial banking—A case study from the Czech Republic. Journal of
Competitiveness, No 1, March 2014, 6, 50–70. https://doi.org/10.
7441/joc.2014.01.04
Busch, T., & Friede, G. (2018). The robustness of the corporate social and
financial performance relation: A second‐order meta‐analysis. Journal
of Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management,
25(4), 583–608. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1480
Carroll, A. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a defini-
tional construct. Business and Society, 38(3), 268–295. https://doi.
org/10.1177/000765039903800303
Chapple, W., & Moon, J. (2005). Corporate social responsibility (CSR) in
Asia: A seven‐country study of CSR reporting website. Business and
Society, 44(4), 415–441. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650305281658
Donalson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the
corporation: Concepts, evidence and implications. Academy of Man-
agement Review, 20(1), 65–91. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.
1995.9503271992
Duc, L. D. M., Yen, N. T. H., Thuy, N. T. X., & Tien, N. H., (2018). Corporate
social responsibility and corporate financial performance. Case of Viet-
namese listed companies. “Czestochowa University Management
TIEN ET AL.
Research Reviews”. 32/2018, 251‐265, https://doi.org/10.17512/
znpcz.2018.4.23.
Dudzevičiūtė, G. (2012). Conceptual approaches towards sustainability.
Journal of Security and Sustainability Issues, 1(4), 261–272. www.lka.lt/
index.php/lt/217049/, https://doi.org/10.9770/jssi.2012.1.4(3)
Dyllick, T., & Hockerts, K. (2002). Beyond the business case for corporate
sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment, 11, 130–141.
https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.323
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review.
Academy of Management and Review, 14(1), 57–74. https://doi.org/10.
5465/amr.1989.4279003
Eweje, G. (2006). The roles of MNEs in community development initiatives
in developing countries. Business and Society, 45(2), 93–129. https://
doi.org/10.1177/0007650305285394
Filek, J. (1996). Freedom and social responsibility in economic activity. Bul-
letin of Business Ethics, Praxeology Scientific Association, December, 2(1),
7–15.
Formankova, S., Hrdličková, A., Kučerová, R., & Skýpalová, R. (2017). Eval-
uation of the applicability CSR standards in the praxis of tertiary
education institutions. Forum Scientiae Oeconomia, 5(1), 94–103.
Hart, S. L. (1995). A natural‐resource based view of the firm. Academy of
Management Review, 20(1), 986–1014. https://doi.org/10.5465/
amr.1995.9512280033
Herremans, I. M. (1993). An investigation of corporate social responsibility
reputation and economic performance. Accounting Organizations and
Society, 18(7), 587–604. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361‐3682(93)
90044‐7
Hill, C. W. L., & Jones, T. M. (1992). Stakeholder–agency theory. Journal of
Management Studies, 29(2), 131–154. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467‐
6486.1992.tb00657.x
Ho, F. N., Wang, H. M. D., Dac, N. H., & Vitell, S. J. (2019). Nature and rela-
tionship between corporate social performance and firm size: A cross‐
national study. Social Responsibility Journal, 15(2), 258–274. https://doi.
org/10.1108/SRJ‐02‐2017‐0025
Hou, T. C. T. (2019). The relationship between corporate social responsibil-
ity and sustainable financial performance: Firm‐level evidence from
Taiwan. Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental
Management, 26(1), 19–28. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1647
Hussain, N., Rigoni, U., & Cavezzali, E. (2018). Does it pay to be sustain-
able? Looking inside the black box of the relationship between
sustainability performance and financial performance. Journal of Corpo-
rate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 25(6),
1198–1211. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1631
Husted, B. W., & Allen, D. B. (2006). Corporate social responsibility in the
multinational enterprise: Strategic and institutional approaches. Journal
of International Business Studies, 37(6), 838–849. https://doi.org/
10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400227
Ite, U. E. (2004). Multinationals and corporate social responsibility in devel-
oping countries: A case study of Nigeria. Corporate Social Responsibility
and Environmental Management, 11(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1002/
csr.49
Jamali, D., & Mirshak, R. (2007). Corporate social responsibility: Theory and
practice in developing country context. Journal of Business Ethics, 72(1),
243–262. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551‐006‐9168‐4
Kemp, D., & Owen, J. R. (2017). Grievance handling at a foreign‐owned
mine in Southeast Asia. Extractive Industries and Society, 4(1),
131–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2016.09.001
Kemp, D., Owen, J. R., & Vimala, D. (2015). Operational intent and devel-
opment impact in mining. In D. Jamali, C. Karam, & M. Blowfield
(Eds.), Development‐oriented Corporate Social Responsibility, Vol. 1, 49‐
11
61, Multinational corporations and the global context. Sheffield, United
Kingdom: Greenleaf Publishing.
Klimek, J. (2012). Corporate social responsibility in Poland. Torun: Adam
Marszalek Publisher.
Kopycinska, D. (2001). Concept of corporate social responsibility—Poetry
of theories and prose of daily life. In W. Gasparski (Ed.), 2001. Business
ethics in action, experiences and perspective. Warsaw: Polish Scientific
Publisher.
Kot, S. (2014). Knowledge and understanding of corporate social responsi-
bility. Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics, 5(2), 109–119.
Küçükbay, F., & Sürücü, E. (2019). Corporate sustainability performance
measurement based on a new multicriteria sorting method. Journal of
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(3),
664–680. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1711
Langenecker, J. G., & Moore, C. W. (1991). Small business management. In
An entrepreneurial emphasis (8th ed.). Chapter 24: Social and ethical
issues. Cincinati Ohio: South‐Western Publishing Company.
Lewicka, S. A. (1999). Ethical standards of companies and workers, Institute
of Philosophy and Sociology. Chapter 3: Principle of corporate duties.
Warsaw: Polish Academy of Science.
Lu, W. S., Ye, M., & Chau, K. W. (2018). The paradoxical nexus between
corporate social responsibility and sustainable financial performance:
Evidence from the international construction business. Journal of Cor-
porate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 25(5),
844–852. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1501
Man, M., & Macris, M. (2015). Integration of corporative governance into
organization's social responsibility system. Polish Journal of Manage-
ment Studies, 11(2), 100–114.
Marcus, A. A. (1981). Policy uncertainty and technological innovation.
Academy of Management Review, 6(3), 443–448.
Marti, C. P., Rosa, M., Lisa, R. V., & Drescher, G. J. (2015). Are firms that
contribute to sustainable development better financially? Journal of
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 22(5),
305–319. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1347
Miliken, F. J. (1987). Three types of perceived uncertainty about the envi-
ronment state, effect and response uncertainty. Academy of
Management Review, 12/1, 113–143.
Mizera, K. (2008). Social responsibility instruments. Contemporary Econom-
ics, 2(3), 83–96.
Muthuri, J., & Gilbert, V. (2011). An institutional analysis of corporate social
responsibility in Kenya. Journal of Business Ethics, 98(1), 467–483.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551‐010‐0588‐9
Piotrkowski, K. (2001). Organization and management. Chapter 17.6: Social
responsibility in the process of management. Warsaw: University of
Economics.
Placier, K. (2011). The impact of recession on the implementation of corpo-
rate social responsibility in companies. Journal of Competitiveness. No,
2(June 2011), 83–98.
Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage. New York: Free Press.
Rajnoha, R., & Lesníková, P. (2016). Strategic performance management sys-
tem and corporate sustainability concept—Specific parameters in Slovak
enterprises. Journal of Competitiveness, September 2016, 107‐124.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2005). Qualitative interviewing: The art of
hearing data (second ed.). California: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/
9781452226651
Sulphey, M. M., & Alkahthani, N. S. (2017). Organization ambidexterity as a
prelude to corporate sustainability. Journal of Security and Sustainability
Issues, 7(2), 335–348. http://doi.org/10.9770/jssi.2017.7.2
12
Sun, W. Z., Zhao, C. G., & Cho, C. H. (2019). Institutional transitions and
the role of financial performance in CSR reporting. Journal of Corporate
Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(2), 367–376.
https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1688
Tian, L., & Estrin, S. (2008). Retained state shareholding in Chinese PLCs:
Does government ownership always reduce corporate value? Journal
of Comparative Economics, 36(1), 74–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jce.2007.10.003
Tien, N. H. (2015). Leadership in socially responsible enterprises. Warsaw:
Ementon Publishing.
Tien, N. H., & Hung Anh, D. B. (2018). Gaining comparative advantage
from CSR policy change—Cases of international corporations in Viet-
nam. Polish Journal of Management Studies. 18(1), 403‐417. https://
doi.org/10.17512/pjms.2018.18.1.30. GICID: 01.3001. 0012.8213.
Tien, N. H., Thao, V. T. T., & Hung Anh, D. B. (2019). Sustainability issues in
social model of corporate social responsibility. Theoretical analysis and
practical implications. Journal of Advanced Research in Management, 19.
No. 1, June, 2019
Visser, W. (2008). Corporate social responsibility in developing countries.
In A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon, & D. Siegel (Eds.),
The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility (pp. 473–479).
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Waheed, A., & Yang, J. H. (2019). Effect of corporate social responsibility
disclosure on firms' sales performance: A perspective of stakeholder
engagement and theory. Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility and
Environmental Management, 26(3), 559–566. https://doi.org/10.1002/
csr.1701
View publication stats
TIEN ET AL.
Wernerfelt, B., & Karnani, A. (1987). Competitive strategy under uncer-
tainty. Strategic Management Journal, 8(2), 18–194.
Wiig, A., & Kolstad, I. (2010). Multinational corporations and host country
institutions: A case study of CSR activities in Angola. International
Business Review, 19(1), 178–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.
2009.11.006
World Business Council for Sustainable Development (1998). Corporate
social responsibility. Date of access: 11/07/2011, http://www.wbcsd.
org/Doc Root/hbdf19Txhmk3kDxBQDWW/CSRmeeting.pdf
World Commission on Environment and Development (1987). Our common
future: Brundtland report. New York: Oxford University Press.
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Califor-
nia: Sage.
Zdravkovic, D., & Radukic, S. (2012). Institutional framework for sustainable
development in Serbia. Montenegrin Journal of Economics, 8(3), 27–36.
Zhu, Q. H., Zou, F., & Zhang, P. (2019). The role of innovation for perfor-
mance improvement through corporate social responsibility practices
among small and medium‐sized suppliers in China. Journal of Corporate
Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(2), 341–350.
https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1686
How to cite this article: Tien NH, Anh DBH, Ngoc NM. Cor-
porate financial performance due to sustainable development
in Vietnam. Corp Soc Resp Env Ma. 2019;1–12. https://doi.
org/10.1002/csr.1836