The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Contesting the Value of “Creating Shared Value”
Abstract
This article critiques Porter and Kramer's concept of creating shared value. The strengths of the idea are highlighted in terms of its popularity among practitioner and academic audiences, its connecting of strategy and social goals, and its systematizing of some previously underdeveloped, disconnected areas of research and practice. However, the concept suffers from some serious shortcomings, namely: it is unoriginal; it ignores the tensions inherent to responsible business activity; it is naïve about business compliance; and it is based on a shallow conception of the corporation's role in society. [Michael Porter and Mark Kramer were invited to respond to this article. Their commentary follows along with a reply by Crane and his co-authors.]
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Double-Edge of Organizational Legitimation
Ashforth, B. E., & Gibbs, B. W. (1990) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1.2.177 · Cited by 2,228
Cited by
Dyllick, T., & Muff, K. (2016) · Organization & Environment · doi:10.1177/1086026615575176 · Cited by 975
Stahl, G. K., Brewster, C. J., Collings, D. G., & Hajro, A. (2020) · Human Resource Management Review · doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2019.100708 · Cited by 502
Business cases for sustainability: a stakeholder theory perspective
Schaltegger, S., Hörisch, J., & Freeman, R. E. (2019) · Organization & Environment · doi:10.1177/1086026617722882 · Cited by 477
Voegtlin, C., & Greenwood, M. (2016) · Human Resource Management Review · doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2015.12.003 · Cited by 385
Corporate Social Responsibility: A Review of Current Concepts, Research, and Issues
Carroll, A. B., & Brown, J. A. (2018) · Corporate Social Responsibility · doi:10.1108/s2514-175920180000002002 · Cited by 224
Metadata
- Authors
- Crane, A., Palazzo, G., Spence, L. J., & Matten, D.
- Venue
- California Management Review
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2014-02
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 130-153
- ISSN
- 0008-1256 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-8564
- OpenAlex
- W2095568617
- Cited by
- 921
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 220.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
