Cited by 4,567Corporate Social Responsibility ReportingCorporate Social Responsibility and SustainabilityManagement and Organizational Studies

“Implicit” and “Explicit” CSR: A Conceptual Framework for a Comparative Understanding of Corporate Social Responsibility

Matten, Dirk, Moon, Jeremy·2008·Academy of Management Review

Abstract

We address the question of how and why corporate social responsibility (CSR) differs among countries and how and why it changes. Applying two schools of thought in institutional theory, we conceptualize, first, the differences between CSR in the United States and Europe and, second, the recent rise of CSR in Europe. We also delineate the potential of our framework for application to other parts of the global economy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5465/amr.2008.31193458

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Organisations take up positions on sustainability due to normative or other external pressures.

    “On this view, organisations take up positions on sustainability due to normative or other external pressures (Matten & Moon 2008; Yang & Rivers 2009 )”
  • Institutional theory allows for a better understanding of the 'diversity and dynamics' of CSR.

    “As Brammer et al. (2012: 7) argue, institutional theory allows for a better understanding of the 'diversity and dynamics' of CSR, a point supported by a number of scholars (eg Campbell, 2007; Matten & Moon, 2008).”
  • Institutional theory has been applied to explain explicit and implicit CSR, ecologically sustainable organisations, and environmentally legitimate firms.

    “Institutional theory (DiMaggio & Powell 1983) has been applied to explain explicit and implicit CSR (Campbell 2007; Matten & Moon 2008), ecologically sustainable organisations (Jennings & Zandbergen 1995) and environmentally legitimate firms (Bansal & Clelland 2004).”
  • Matten and Moon (2008) cite mimetic processes, including membership of business alliances such as the United Nations Global Compact and Dow Jones Sustainability Index, which seek to institutionalize practices across member organisations and alliances with government networks to foster sustainable business practices.

    “Matten and Moon (2008) cite mimetic processes, including membership of business alliances such as the United Nations Global Compact and Dow Jones Sustainability Index, which seek to institutionalize practices across member organisations and alliances with government networks to foster sustainable business practices.”
  • Matten & Moon (2008) claim compliance with environmental standards, including ISO 14000 and EMAS, applied through the supply chain imposes coercive isomorphism on a range of organisations.

    “(Matten & Moon 2008) claim compliance with environmental standards, including ISO 14000 and Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS), applied through the supply chain imposes coercive isomorphism on a range of organisations.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Matten, D., & Moon, J.
Affiliations
  • York University (CA)
  • University of Nottingham (GB)
Venue
Academy of Management Review
Published
2008-04
Volume
33
Issue
2
Pages
404-424
ISSN
  • 0363-7425 (ISSN-L)
  • 1930-3807
OpenAlex
W2125530884
Cited by
4,567
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 240 · 2025: 248 · 2024: 263 · 2023: 283 · 2022: 309 · 2021: 310 · 2020: 347 · 2019: 336 · 2018: 331 · 2017: 282 · 2016: 285 · 2015: 277 · 2014: 258 · 2013: 242 · 2012: 173
FWCI
376.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Academy of Management Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainability
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
Keywords
corporate social responsibility, institutional theory, United States–Europe comparison, conceptual framework

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