Journals / Gaziantep Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2018 / Cilt: 17 - Sayı: 4

A Comparative Analysis of Corporate Social Responsibility Activities of Companies in Banking Industry: An Application From Turkey

Bankacılık Sektöründeki Şirketlerin Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluk Faaliyetlerinin Karşılaştırmalı Analizi: Türkiye Uygulaması

Pages
1474–1490
Publication Date
2018-09-27
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Research findings reveal that there are not significant differences between Isbank (private bank) and VakıfBank (national bank) with regard to the fulfilment of their social responsibilities.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The main purpose of this study is to investigate CSR activities of national, foreign and private banks listed in Borsa İstanbul (BIST) 30 Index in Turkey and reveal the differences between these banks in terms of the fulfilment of their social responsibilities.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In parallel with the study purpose, CSR practises of three different banks listed in BIST 30 Index as of the second quarter of year 2016 were analyzed.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Research findings reveal that there are not significant differences between Isbank (private bank) and VakıfBank (national bank) with regard to the fulfilment of their social responsibilities.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2016 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Kurumsal sosyal sorumluluk · bankalar · Borsa İstanbul

Abstract

The main purpose of this study is to investigate CSR activities of national, foreign and private banks listed in Borsa İstanbul (BIST) 30 Index in Turkey and reveal the differences between these banks in terms of the fulfilment of their social responsibilities. Within this scope; the concept of CSR, CSR definitions, the main reasons of CSR activities and four dimensions of CSR constitute the conceptual framework of the study. On the other hand; shareholder theory, stakeholder theory and institutional theory establish the theoretical framework of this study. In parallel with the study purpose, CSR practises of three different banks listed in BIST 30 Index as of the second quarter of year 2016 were analyzed. The relevant data were acquired from archival sources such as corporate governance compliance reports, annual sustainability reports and official company websites. The qualitative research was considered to be useful method to clarify the differences in social responsibility practises. For this reason, content analysis as a qualitative research method was used in order to investigate CSR activities of banks. Research findings reveal that there are not significant differences between Isbank (private bank) and VakıfBank (national bank) with regard to the fulfilment of their social responsibilities. On the other side, Garanti Bank (foreign bank) implements more CSR practises in comparison with other banks. This dissimilarity is also observed among CSR headings. All in all, a great majority of CSR activities are carried out about environmental conservation and stakeholders.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, Borsa İstanbul (BİST) 30 Endeksi’nde işlem gören bankaların kurumsal sosyal sorumluluk faaliyetlerini araştırmak ve sosyal sorumluluklarını yerine getirme hususunda aralarındaki farklılıkları ortaya koymaktır. Bu kapsamda; KSS kavramı, KSS tanımları, KSS faaliyetlerinin başlıca nedenleri ve KSS’nin dört boyutu çalışmanın kavramsal çerçevesini teşkil etmektedir. Diğer taraftan; hissedar kuramı, paydaş kuramı ve kuramsal kuram ise çalışmanın teorik altyapısını oluşturmaktadır. Çalışmanın amacı doğrultusunda, 2016 yılının ikinci çeyreğinde BIST 30 Endeksi’ndeki üç farklı bankanın KSS faaliyetleri incelenmiştir. İlgili veri şirketlerin; kurumsal yönetim uyum raporları, yıllık sürdürülebilirlik raporları ve resmi internet siteleri gibi arşivsel kaynaklardan elde edilmiştir. Sosyal sorumluluk uygulamalarındaki farklılıkları açıklığa kavuşturmak için nitel araştırma metodunun uygulanması düşünülmüştür. Bu nedenle, bankaların kurumsal sosyal sorumluluk uygulamalarındaki farklılıkları araştırmak amacıyla nitel araştırma yöntemlerinden içerik analizi kullanılmıştır. Araştırma sonuçları, sosyal sorumlukların yerine getirilmesi bakımından İş Bankası (özel banka) ile Vakıfbank (kamu bankası) arasında önemli bir fark olmadığını göstermiştir. Öte yandan, bu bankalara nazaran Garanti Bankası (yabancı banka) daha fazla KSS uygulaması yürütmektedir. Bu farklılık, KSS başlıkları arasında da gözlemlenmiştir. Genel olarak değerlendirildiğinde, KSS faaliyetlerinin büyük çoğunluğunun çevre koruma ve paydaşlar hakkında gerçekleştirildiği görülmüştür.

🔖

Cite This Article

DEMİRCİ, U. (2018). A Comparative Analysis of Corporate Social Responsibility Activities of Companies in Banking Industry: An Application From Turkey. Gaziantep Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 17 - Sayı: 4, 1474–1490. https://ajindex.com/articles/116685

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Abbott, W. F. & Monsen, R. J. (1979). On the measurement of corporate social responsibility: Self-reported disclosures as a method of measuring corporate social involvement. Academy of Management Journal, 22(3), 501-515.
  2. Aktan, C. C. & Börü, D. (2007). Kurumsal sosyal sorumluluk. İstanbul:
  3. İgiad. Anderson, J. C. & Frankle, A. W. (1980). Voluntary social reporting: An iso-beta portfolio analysis. The Accounting Review, 55, 467-479.
  4. Ataman, G. (2001). İşletme yönetimi: Temel kavramlar ve yeni yaklaşımlar. İstanbul:
  5. Türkmen. Basu, K. & Palazzo, G. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: A process model of sensemaking. Academy of Management Review, 33(1), 122-136.
  6. Bilgehan, M. (2012). A comparative analysis of corporate social responsibility practices of Turkish companies and companies with foreign ownership (Unpublished Master’s Thesis). Bogazici University, İstanbul.
  7. Blaikie, N. (2000). Designing social research: The logic of anticipation. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  8. Borsa İstanbul (2016). http://www.borsaistanbul.com/en/indices/bist-stock-indices
  9. Borsa İstanbul (2016). http://www.borsaistanbul.com/docs/default-source/endeksler/bist-stock-indices-ground rules.pdf?sfvrsn=12 Bowen, H. R. (1953). Social responsibilities of the businessman. New York: Harper & Row. Bowman, E. H. & Haire, M. (1975). A strategic posture toward corporate social responsibility. California Management Review, 18(2), 49-58.
  10. Bryman, A. (1988). Quantity and quality in social research, London: Unwin Hyman. Bryman, A. & Bell, E. (2007).
  11. Business research methods, New York: Oxford University Press.
  12. Campbell, J. L. (2007). Why would corporations behave in social responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32, 946-967.
  13. Carr, A. Z. (1968). Is business bluffing ethical? Harvard Business Review, 46(1), 143-153.
  14. Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497-505.
  15. Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4) 39-48.
  16. Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility. Business & Society, 38(3), 268. Carroll, A. B. & Buchholtz A. K. (2000). Business and society: Ethics and stakeholder management. Cincinnati: South Western College Publishing. Cresswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oak