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

net/publication/374920726

Managerial understanding of corporate social responsibility in Nepal

Article in International Journal of Law and Management · October 2023

DOI: 10.1108/IJLMA-12-2022-0272

CITATION READS

1 199

4 authors, including:

Bal Ram Chapagain Pushkar Bajracharya

Tribhuvan University Tribhuvan University
19 PUBLICATIONS 60 CITATIONS 1 PUBLICATION 1 CITATION

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Dhruba Gautam
Tribhuvan University
48 PUBLICATIONS 535 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Dhruba Gautam on 07 November 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/1754-243X.htm

Managerial
Managerial understanding of understanding
corporate social responsibility
in Nepal
Bal Ram Chapagain
Central Department of Management, Faculty of Management,
Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal Received 27 December 2022
Revised 27 June 2023
Accepted 2 October 2023
Pushkar Bajracharya and Dev Raj Adhikari
Faculty of Management, Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal, and
Dhruba Kumar Gautam
Faculty of Management, Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal and
Nepalese Academy of Management, Kathmandu, Nepal

Abstract
Purpose – Considering the ongoing debate regarding the roles of business in society, this paper aims to
examine the managerial understanding of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in Nepal.
Design/methodology/approach – This study uses explanatory sequential design under mixed methods
of research. First, the questionnaire survey method was used to collect data from 168 managers of listed
companies in Nepal. Second, semistructured interviews were conducted with 20 senior-level managers of
listed companies to verify the results obtained from the survey and to gain a deeper understanding of the
phenomena.
Findings – The survey results show that managerial understanding of CSR is mainly guided by the notions
of corporate philanthropy, stakeholder approach and political CSR, respectively. However, the managerial
understanding vis-
a-vis political CSR and corporate philanthropy were found to be remarkably positively
influenced by the firm’s size, whereas the stakeholder perspective was widely held by the managers
regardless of their firm’s size. The interview results largely substantiated questionnaire survey findings and
further revealed vivid dimensions within the philanthropic approach, stakeholder approach and political CSR.
Practical implications – Given the recent legal provisions vis-
a-vis mandatory CSR spending in Nepal,
the policymakers may devise and update common core and firm-size-specific informational, fiscal-economic,
legal and partnering instruments based on the findings of this study. Besides, companies may go for
appropriate institutional arrangements for CSR as needed.
Originality/value – The reaffirmation of conventionally accepted roles and the approval of relatively
nascent political roles of business in a distinct socio–political–legal–economic context of Nepal can be an
important contribution to the literature.
Keywords Corporate social responsibility, Managerial understanding, Firm size, Nepal
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
The concept of social responsibility of business, also known as corporate social responsibility
(CSR), is essentially dynamic (Carroll, 1999; Matten and Moon, 2020) and debatable
(Athanasopoulou, 2012; Matten and Moon, 2008) having unclear boundaries (Lantos, 2001). International Journal of Law and
Management
The lack of consensus regarding the responsibilities of business toward society is generally © Emerald Publishing Limited
1754-243X
attributed to the differences in managerial value systems (Turker and Ozmen, 2018; DOI 10.1108/IJLMA-12-2022-0272
IJLMA Windsor, 2006), firm characteristics (Cincalova and Hedija, 2020) and differences in the
sociocultural, political–legal and economic context of countries in which companies operate
(Abdul Rashid and Ibrahim, 2002; Tilt, 2016). In the early decades of its development,
the concept of CSR was mainly considered as a moral obligation of business toward society
(Bowen, 1953). However, today, it is also understood as a strategic tool to gain social power
and proactively shape the political–legal agenda (Ehrnström-Fuentes and Böhm, 2023;
Elembilassery, 2023).
It is worth noting that the practice of CSR in the real world of business depends on how
the term is understood (Freeman and Hasnaoui, 2011). Hence, a thorough and updated
knowledge regarding the managerial understanding of CSR is a precondition for
understanding current CSR practices and it provides implications for future research, policy
and practice.
Several studies have been carried out in exploring the managerial understanding of CSR.
Semistructured interviews with senior-level managers of big companies and a content
analysis of corporate websites’ CSR statements in the West indicated that CSR has moved
beyond the early philanthropic roots to an extensive strategic business practice (Silberhorn
and Warren, 2007). The concept has been comprehended contextually in developing
countries of the Global South. For instance, Colombian executives attached high importance
to environmental integrity, business ethics, health and safety, quality of products and
services, human rights and so on, while they gave the least importance to profitability
(Pastrana and Sriramesh, 2014). A recent study conducted in the American and Chinese
contexts found that despite the attempts to provide a univocal definition of CSR, the essence
of CSR has become eventually localized to fit the social needs in which companies
are located (Bu et al., 2022). Thus, it appears that the understanding of CSR is gradually
moving from short-term profit-making and corporate philanthropy to strategic business
practice and environmental integrity along with contextualization.
Therefore, evidence found in the Western and developed country contexts may not be
valid in the distinct sociocultural, political–legal and economic contexts of least developed
and developing countries like Nepal and India in the global south. For instance, a recent
study revealed that Indian bankers understand CSR as a moral duty of business to do
something for the welfare of society, beyond core banking operations (Pratihari and Uzma,
2020). However, this study does not cover a wide array of industrial sectors and uses only
the qualitative approach of inquiry. Likewise, Visser (2008) contends that economic
responsibilities get the highest priority followed by philanthropic responsibilities in
developing countries. But, it must be empirically tested before drawing any inferences.
Furthermore, most of the studies as of now have focused either on large companies
(Fitzpatrick, 2000; Pedersen and Neergaard, 2009; Skouloudis et al., 2015) or no comparison
has been made between the understanding of CSR among the managers of small, medium
and large companies (Quartey and Quartey, 2015; Sastry, 2011). The scholarship also
suggests that CSR perceptions and practices may vary across firm sizes (Sweeney, 2009)
mainly due to their varied resources, capabilities and motivations (Lepoutre and Heene,
2006; Matten and Moon, 2020; Scherer, 2017).
Interestingly, Nepal has recently made some legal provisions regarding mandatory
spending on CSR. Industrial Enterprises Act, 2020 (Ministry of Law, Justice and
Parliamentary Affairs, 2020), Industrial Enterprises Rules, 2022 (Ministry of Industry,
Commerce and Supplies, 2022) and Unified Directives of the central bank of Nepal (Nepal
Rastra Bank, 2021) have mandated specified types of industrial enterprises and all banking
and financial institutions (BFIs) to spend at least 1% of their annual net profit on CSR
activities. Since the detailed standard operating procedures for regulating business behavior
vis-
a-vis mandatory CSR are yet to come, there is a need to shed some light on the managerial Managerial
understanding of CSR along with an attempt to identify the differences in understanding understanding
between large, medium and small firms through a robust study. Thus, a fundamental
question on CSR particularly in the Nepalese context is how executives and managers of
various firm sizes understand their responsibilities toward society.
Against this scenario, the study intends to fill the gap regarding the managerial
understanding of CSR using a mixed method of research covering a wide array of industrial
sectors and making a comparison among different firm sizes in the Nepalese context. Hence,
this paper could advance the current knowledge in the existing literature by suggesting an
updated and possibly a new paradigm of CSR in a distinct socioeconomic and political–legal
context of Nepal. Besides, it may also provide important insights to policymakers and
practitioners particularly in the global south, such as India and Mauritius, where the interest
of governments and other stakeholders in CSR is substantially increasing in the wake of
recent legal provisions on CSR spending.
With all these matters in mind, the other parts of the paper are structured as follows.
Section 2 presents a review of the relevant literature, followed by the research context and
questions in Section 3. Then, an account of the methodology that forms the basis of this
work is delineated in Section 4. This is followed by the presentation of results in Section 5.
The results are discussed in Section 6, and the conclusion and implications are drawn in
Section 7.

2. Review of literature
Studies conducted in different parts of the world have revealed different findings regarding
the managerial understanding of CSR. A recent study conducted among hotel sector
employees and managers indicated that ethical business practices, legal compliance and
financial performance of the business are more important responsibilities of business than
philanthropic and environmental activities (Wong and Kim, 2023). However, a study carried
out among 118 Greek executives and managers revealed that occupational health and safety,
product responsibility, environmental performance and responsible marketing are more
important than governance and ethics issues (Skouloudis et al., 2015). A recent study
conducted in Turkey and Slovenia revealed interesting findings. In Turkey, the
philanthropic essence of CSR was highly dominant, while the Slovenian meaning of CSR
was multifaceted (Galob et al., 2018). The Slovenian understanding of CSR was mainly
characterized by ethical principles and integrity, general social and stakeholder concerns,
general environmental and sustainability concerns and concern for employees and working
conditions.
Senior-level executives of commercial banks in India perceive CSR as an altruistic
philanthropy, i.e. an unselfish and unconditional giving designed to promote the welfare of
society beyond core business operations (Pratihari and Uzma, 2020). In a similar vein,
Vietnamese executives from domestic companies and NGOs also articulated that companies
are responsible for charitable giving and improving the well-being of Vietnamese citizens
which are embedded in Vietnamese culture and religious beliefs (L. Kane et al., 2022).
Likewise, a study conducted among Pakistani executives, consultants and national
regulators revealed that the understanding of CSR in Pakistan is mainly characterized by
caring for the community and environment (Khan et al., 2021). Thus, it appears that in some
contexts, such as in the USA, maximizing profit by remaining within the rules of the game is
understood as the important role of business in society whereas, in some other contexts,
such as in India and Vietnam, philanthropic activities are more important.
IJLMA Literature also indicates that the managerial understanding of CSR is also influenced by the
firm’s size. Sweeney (2009) in the Irish context found that managers of smaller organizations
understand CSR as community philanthropy. However, managers from large firms defined CSR
as the obligation of a business to fulfill the interests of all stakeholders including employees,
shareholders, customers, suppliers and the local communities. Table 1 summarizes the findings
of selected empirical studies regarding the managerial understanding of CSR across different
countries and organizational contexts.
Despite the emergence of new perspectives on CSR, such as creating shared value (CSV)
and political CSR in the recent decades, a review of extant literature reveals that the
managerial understanding of CSR is still dominated by corporate philanthropy, stakeholder
perspectives, environmental performance, profitability and legal and ethical considerations.
This may be attributed to inadequacies in the research methods, such as the findings
obtained from a questionnaire survey including limited items based on limited theoretical
perspectives or because of concluding the interviews before data saturation occurs, and so
on. It may also be because practicing managers are not aware of or have not yet accepted the
propositions regarding the changing roles of business in society. Apparently, few studies
(Sweeney, 2009) to date have focused on exploring the managerial understanding of CSR
across different firm sizes using a mixed method of research.
Some studies regarding the managers’ attitudes and views on CSR have been conducted
in the Nepalese context as well. Chapagain (2008) found that the views of managers of the
Nepalese banking sector on CSR were mainly guided by moral perspectives rather than
strategic ones. Likewise, Adhikari et al. (2016) have reported that the CSR perspectives of
Nepalese executives and opinion leaders closely resembled with economic responsibilities of
business. However, a recent study among tourism SMEs in Nepal has indicated that though
Nepalese managers regard CSR as a moral duty of business to do something for the benefit
of society, it also has strategic benefits (Baniya and Rajak, 2020). Despite some valuable
insights, CSR literature in the Nepalese context in this specific issue suffers from some
limitations. First, most of the existing studies have been conducted in specific industry
sectors such as banking or tourism. Second, none of the previous studies in the Nepalese
context have used a mixed method of research to take dual advantages of generalization and
a deeper understanding of the phenomenon. Third, differences in managerial understanding
of CSR by firm sizes have never been tested. Finally, as far as the authors are aware, survey
questionnaires are mostly guided by a specific theoretical perspective only (such as by
stakeholder theory or Carroll’s CSR pyramid), failing to capture the comprehensive
paradigm regarding the managerial understanding of CSR.

3. Research context and questions

Nepal, with over 30 million population, has undergone major political, economic and social
transformation processes over the last 30 years. Nepal is now an independent, indivisible,
sovereign, secular, inclusive, democratic, socialism-oriented, federal democratic republican
state (Nepal Law Commission, 2015). It is among the least developed countries bordered by
two giant economies – China and India. It has its own distinct sociocultural and religious
context. Unlike many other countries in the west, particularly the USA, Nepal has the
cultural attributes of low individualism, high power distance, uncertainty avoidance and
femininity (Gautam et al., 2001). Most of the people in Nepal are Hindus with the religious
belief of going to swarga (heaven) if they make some social or philanthropic contribution and
going to narka (hell) if they harm others, after their death (Legal, 2006).
With the promulgation of the new constitution and political stability in the country,
achieving higher economic growth together with equitable distribution of the outcome
Authors Study method Sample Context Key findings

Fitzpatrick (2000) Questionnaire 150 CEOs US large companies Profitability, legal compliance and ethical conduct of business
survey rather than philanthropic activities
Pedersen and Case study Interviews: 10; survey: Large multinational Environmental integrity, attending to global social problems
Neergaard (2009) 149 managers company and attending to stakeholder concerns
Pedersen (2010) Questionnaire 1,000 managers Eight large Mainly the respect for the environment. Other concerns
survey international firms included satisfying customer needs, employee well-being and
social welfare and development
Sastry (2011) Round table 3 panelists and 1 Indian businesses Earn profits, address environmental and ethical concerns and
discussion moderator do well for creating social value
Athanasopoulou Case study Interviews with 24 Three UK-based Int’l All managers agreed that CSR goes beyond shareholder
(2012) managers firms interests including community and environmental
responsibility and business ethics
Pastrana and Mixed Interviews: 7; survey: 54 Colombian SMEs CSR should be integrated into core business functions. The
Sriramesh, 2014) managers main issues are environment, employees, business ethics and
products and services
Aribi and Arun Interviews 18 Senior managers Islamic FIs in Managers had a thorough understanding of CSR – ranging
(2015) Bahrain from ethical conduct to stakeholder responsibility and giving
back to society
Skouloudis et al. Questionnaire 118 Executives and Greek large Health and safety, environmental performance, product
(2015) survey managers companies responsibility and responsible marketing
Adhikari et al. Focus group 21 Executives and Industrial cities of CSR intents closely resemble with economic responsibilities of
(2016) discussion opinion leaders Nepal business
Pratihari and Interviews 26 Senior-level Scheduled Give something back to society beyond core business
Uzma (2020) executives commercial banks in operations such as contributing to community health and
India education and rural infrastructure development
Khan et al. (2021) In-depth 23 Executives, regulators Listed companies in Community development, environmental protection, donations
interviews and consultants Pakistan to charity organizations and ethical business practices
L. Kane et al. Focus group 20 Executives in three Vietnamese Charitable giving and improving the quality of life of
(2022) discussion focus groups companies and NGOs Vietnamese citizens
Wong and Kim Questionnaire 633 Employees and Hotel industry in the Mainly the ethical business practices, legal compliance and
(2023) survey managers USA financial performance of the business

Source: Summarized by the authors from the review of empirical studies

understanding of
managerial
empirical studies on
Table 1.
understanding
Managerial

CSR
Summary of selected
IJLMA derived has now become the priority of the country. To this end, however, several questions
are bound to arise regarding the roles and responsibilities to be discharged by the different
actors including the corporate sector. Against this backdrop, Industrial Enterprises Act,
2020 has made a mandatory requirement to allocate and spend at least one percent of the
annual net profit on CSR-related activities for all large and medium-sized enterprises as well
as for small and cottage enterprises whose annual sales turnover exceeds 150m rupees
(Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, 2020). Recently, Industrial Enterprise
Rules, 2022 has indicated eight different areas of CSR spending including disaster risk
reduction and management, community health and education, environment and energy and
community infrastructures. Likewise, Nepal Rastra Bank (NRB)’s Unified Directives has
also mandated all BFIs to spend at least 1% of their annual net profit on CSR activities
(Nepal Rastra Bank, 2021). However, detailed implementation and reporting guidelines in
line with the requirements of the concerned act, rules and directives have not been developed
yet. Thus, the scientific investigation of how managers in the typical context of Nepal
understand CSR can provide important insights for preparing informed policy guidelines.
Common core guidelines may be prepared considering aggregated understanding of
managers and the firm’s size-specific guidelines may be prepared considering the
managerial understanding vis-
a-vis firm size. The findings may also provide valuable
insights to the managers and policymakers of other countries, such as India, having similar
sociocultural, economic and political–legal contexts.
Given the literature review presented above and the research context, this paper attempts
to provide answers to the following research questions:

RQ1. How do Nepalese managers understand CSR?

RQ2. Is there a significant difference in managerial understanding of CSR for small,
medium-sized and large firms?

4. Research methodology
4.1 Research design
Among the various mixed methods research designs, this study used an explanatory
sequential design (QUAN-qual) with more emphasis on the quantitative phase (Creswell,
2012; Tashakkori and Teddlie, 1998). The rationale for using the explanatory sequential
design is that “the quantitative data and results provide a general picture of the research
problem; more analysis, specifically through qualitative data collection, is needed to refine,
extend, or explain the general picture” (Creswell, 2012, p. 542). The researchers believed that
the managerial understanding of CSR is a complex issue, which cannot be fully examined
through predefined categories of responses as it may be influenced by the unique set of
values, beliefs and traditions of individuals or society. Emphasis was given to the
quantitative phase as quantitative results, particularly the inferential statistics, have a high
predictive power (Ivankova and Stick, 2007) and, hence, one can deduce generalizations with
practical and/or theoretical implications.
First, the questionnaire survey was conducted, and quantitative data were analyzed to
identify the prevalent tendencies and examine the statistical as well as the practical
significance of the results. Then, 20 senior-level executives and managers were interviewed
from among the exhaustive list of respondents of the questionnaire survey phase, using a
stratified purposeful sampling technique. The interview data were analyzed using the
reflexive thematic analysis approach. Finally, the quantitative and qualitative results were
synthesized in line with the research questions raised. Figure 1 illustrates a summary of the Managerial
research design of the study. understanding
4.2 Population and sample
The population of the study comprises managers of 201 companies listed in the Nepal Stock
Exchange (NEPSE). The sample for the questionnaire survey included 168 firms
represented by one senior-level manager from each firm. Note that, the sample size confirms
the requirement of generalized scientific guidelines for research activities suggested by
Krejcie and Morgan (1970). In addition, it also meets the minimum sample size requirement
for performing one-way ANOVA, i.e. 159, while considering a priori (effect size f ¼ 0.25,
a ¼ 0.05, power ¼ 0.8 and the number of groups ¼ 3) using GPower 3.1 software as
suggested by the scholars in the field (Karadag and Aktas, 2012; Sawyer, 2009). The
response rate was 88.4% out of 190 randomly distributed questionnaires. Among them,
32.7% of firms were small (firms having fixed assets less than 150m rupees), 24.4% were
medium (firms having fixed assets within the range of 150–500m rupees) and 42.9%
were large (firms having fixed assets more than 500m rupees). This classification is based
on the existing provisions of the Industrial Enterprise Act, 2020 of Nepal.
The sampling method adopted for the semistructured interviews was stratified
purposive. As noted by Patton (2002, p. 240), “the main purpose of a stratified purposeful
sample is to capture major variations rather than to identify a common core, although the
latter may also emerge in the analysis.” Under this, the sampling frame is divided into strata
to obtain relatively homogeneous subgroups, and a purposeful sample is selected from each
stratum to secure needed expert opinion for a particular purpose (Onwuegbuzie and Collins,
2007).
Though Guest et al. (2006) have stated that information saturation occurs within the first
12 interviews, 20 interviews were conducted mainly to ensure the adequate representation of
different categories and sizes of firms listed in the NEPSE and considering the subjective
judgment of data saturation during the interview phase. As suggested by Francis et al.
(2010), a “stopping criterion” was used to ascertain information saturation. After the 17th
interview, no further insights were gained till the 20th interview and, hence, it was believed

Phase Procedure/Techniques

x Questionnaire development, pretesting, administration, and collection

Questionnaire Survey and
x Inspection of the dataset and addressing critical issues
Quantitative Data Analysis
x Data analysis techniques: Means, Reliability test (Cronbach's alpha),
Normality test (S-W test), One-way ANOVA test, Eta squared

x Semi-structured interview guide development, participant

Semi-structured interviews identification, and execution of interviews with identified participants
and qualitative data analysis x Reflexive thematic analysis of the interview data

Integration of the
x Synthesis of the quantitative and qualitative results and interpretation
quantitative and
of the final results through discussion, conclusion, and implications
qualitative results
Figure 1.
Research design of
the study
Source: Developed by authors
IJLMA that information saturation occurred. This is in line with the argument that the data
saturation point for reflexive thematic analysis is subjective and cannot be precisely
determined in advance of analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2019b). However, the interview
sample size also satisfies the rule of thumb suggested by scholars in the field. For instance,
Lincoln and Guba (1985, p. 235) suggest that 12–20 participants are sufficient for interview
studies. In a similar vein, Bernard (2013, p. 175) also argues that 10–20 knowledgeable
people are sufficient for this purpose. It is also congruent with the practice of some
recent studies using a semistructured interview technique (Fisher and Law, 2021; Gautam
and Gautam, 2023). Table 2 portrays the framework of the sample for semistructured
interviews.
As shown in Table 2, semistructured interviews included CEOs, senior-level managers
and CSR managers (wherever available). The assumption is that the senior-level people and
those who look after the company’s CSR affairs can better articulate their understanding of
CSR and can provide more candid information in additional probes.

4.3 Data collection methods, instruments and procedures

This study used a questionnaire survey and semistructured interview methods for data
collection. The questionnaire survey method was chosen because it allows the identification
of typical attributes of the subject of research (Czaja and Blair, 2005), and provides a quick,
inexpensive and accurate means of evaluating information about a population (Zikmund
et al., 2013). In addition, the interview method was chosen as it offers greater flexibility
(Bryman and Bell, 2011) and facilitates the gathering of more thorough data by repeating or
rephrasing the questions as needed (Sekaran and Bougie, 2016). During the first phase of the
study, the structured questionnaire was developed, pretested and then the final version of it
was provided to the identified respondents along with a cover letter.

Category of firms Firm’s code Firm’s size Participant’s designation

Commercial banks C1 Large CEO

C2 Large Assistant GM
C3 Large Deputy CEO
Development banks C4 Small CEO
C5 Medium CEO
C6 Small CEO
C7 Large CEO
Finance companies C8 Small CEO
C9 Medium Deputy CEO
C10 Small CEO
Insurance companies C11 Small CEO
C12 Medium CEO
C13 Large CEO
Manufacturing and processing companies C14 Large HR manager
C15 Large Marketing manager
Hydropower companies C16 Large CSR manager
Table 2. C17 Large Company secretary
Hotels C18 Large HR director
Framework of Trading firms C19 Large Head – HR, R&D
sample for Others C20 Large Deputy GM
semistructured
interviews Source: Authors’ data file
The structured questionnaire consisted of seven constructs having five items under each Managerial
construct on a five-point Likert scale. The validity of the data collection instrument was understanding
ensured through an extensive review of relevant theoretical and empirical literature in the
global context (Andrews, 1952; Carr, 1968; Carroll, 1979, 1991; Davenport, 2000; Elkington,
1997; Fernandez-Gamez et al., 2019; Freeman, 1984; Friedman, 1970; Koch, 1979; Matten and
Crane, 2005; Porter and Kramer, 2006, 2011; Scherer and Palazzo, 2011; Scherer et al., 2016;
Tortosa-Edo and Lopez-Navarro, 2021) as well as in the Nepalese context (Chapagain, 2020;
Sthapit, 2021) while preparing the instrument. For instance, the five items for CSR vis-
a-vis
corporate philanthropy have been adopted from Carroll (1991) and the items for CSV
approach have been derived from Porter and Kramer (2011).
The questionnaire was further refined by pretesting it with the business managers and
experienced academics and making necessary adjustments to fit the Nepalese context. The
following are examples of measurement items under different constructs included in
the questionnaire: I suppose that: the sole purpose of business is to turn out a product or
service at a profit (pure profit-making); business should strive to become consistently
profitable while remaining within the rules of the game in the industry (constrained profit-
making); it is important for a business to assist voluntarily those projects that enhance
community’s quality of life (corporate philanthropy); business should initiate and engage in
genuine dialogue with its stakeholders (stakeholder approach); it is important for a business
to demonstrate a commitment to sustainable development (triple bottom line); business
should continuously strive to reconceive products that meet previously unmet needs in the
market (CSV); and it is important for a business to engage in fulfilling governance gaps
where public authorities are unable to do so (political CSR).
The criteria of convergent validity were also met since the items under each construct
were adequately correlated with each other (p < 0.05). Likewise, Cronbach’s alpha
coefficients for all constructs were above 0.7 but below 0.9, which indicates that the inter-
item consistency reliability of each construct was adequate while also there were no
redundant items in the constructs (Nunnally, 1978; Tavakol and Dennick, 2011).
After the questionnaire survey phase, the researcher requested the identified managers
for interviews through e-mail with the basic information about the research and asked them
for an appropriate date, time and venue for interviews at their convenience. Follow-up and
reminder calls were also done as required. All interviews, except one, took place on the
firm’s premises. The interviews were generally conducted in English, but some respondents
used the Nepali language too at their convenience, particularly in giving examples to
reinforce their idea. The audio recording was done during interviews by taking due
permission from the interview participants. Probing questions were asked as deemed
appropriate. The semistructured interview guide consisted of two parts. The first part was
concerned with knowing about the participant’s profile and the company’s involvement in
CSR activities in general particularly to build a rapport. The second part was dedicated to
exploring the actual understanding of CSR held by the managers. The interviews lasted
from 20 to 35 min depending on how interested the interviewees were in elaborating their
understanding with vivid examples and metaphors.

4.4 Data analysis tools and techniques

4.4.1 Quantitative data analysis. First, quantitative data obtained from the questionnaire
survey were analyzed using mean values for different constructs of CSR to explore the
managerial understanding of CSR. Then, the assumption of normality of data was tested
using Shapiro–Wilk (S–W) test. The significance level of the S–W test indicated that the
IJLMA data were normally distributed (p > 0.05) except for a marginal exception for the triple
bottom line approach (p ¼ 0.047, see Table 3).
After that, a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test for differences of means was
conducted to know whether there is any influence of the firm’s size on the managerial
understanding of CSR. Whenever the statistical significance was obtained in the difference
between means, the effect size was calculated through eta squared (h2) to better understand
the practical and theoretical significance of the findings. According to Cohen (1988), the rule
of thumb is that values around 0.01 indicate a small effect, 0.06 indicates a medium effect
and 0.14 or more indicates a large effect. Likewise, whenever significant differences were
found between groups, post hoc analyses were done using the Gabriel procedure to ascertain
which pair(s) of groups contributed to the differences in means.
4.4.2 Qualitative data analysis. Data obtained through semistructured interviews were
analyzed using a reflexive thematic analysis approach (Braun and Clarke, 2006, 2013,
2019a). Among various qualitative analytic approaches, reflexive thematic analysis was
chosen mainly because – the study aims to provide theoretically informed patterns in data
rather than develop theory from the data set, and it can be faster than other approaches such
as grounded theory (Braun and Clarke, 2020); the need for the research is not only to
understand the phenomenon but also draw implications for practice (Sandelowski and
Leeman, 2012); and it offers more concrete and easy to follow guidelines for analysis (Braun
and Clarke, 2006, 2013).
For this purpose, first, the responses were transcribed along with translation from Nepali
to English, wherever required. Second, the transcribed data were read several times to be
intimately familiar with the data. Third, the data were unitized, categorized, coded and
the frequencies of each code were noted down. As suggested by Srnka and Koeszegi (2007),
a deductive–inductive procedure was followed in developing categories. The coding
procedure started with coding schemes vis-
a-vis widely accepted theoretical perspectives on
CSR (deductive step) and the predefined categories were changed, eliminated, or added
based on the nature of actual data (inductive step). Besides the researcher, an experienced
coder was also involved in the coding process and the discrepancies in coding schemes
between the two were resolved through discussions.
Next, similar types of codes were collated into different clusters. Then after, the different
clusters were arranged under various themes and subthemes along with their central idea
and the total frequencies. The titles of themes and subthemes were given based on the
theoretical perspectives to which they resemble closely. Finally, a summary report was
prepared by including vivid extract examples and quotes, a summary table of the emerged
themes and a final analysis vis-
a-vis the research questions raised. However, the movement
was back and forth as needed, throughout the phases, as suggested by Patton (2014). It is

Approaches to corporate social responsibility Mean Cronbach’s alpha S–W test (sig.)

Pure profit-making approach 2.40 0.772 0.069

Constrained profit-making (aka shareholder) approach 3.51 0.704 0.065
Corporate philanthropy 3.68 0.749 0.051
Table 3. Stakeholder approach 3.64 0.846 0.064
Triple bottom line (people, profit and planet) approach 3.39 0.700 0.047
Managerial Creating shared value (CSV) approach 3.09 0.705 0.055
understanding of Political corporate social responsibility (PCSR) 3.60 0.704 0.050
corporate social
responsibility Source: Calculations by the authors from the data files
also noteworthy to mention that the development and refinement of themes were not Managerial
independent of the researcher. The researcher’s knowledge, skills, experience and values understanding
mediated the process of defining, refining and mapping the themes and subthemes. This is
particularly relevant in the reflexive thematic analysis approach (Braun and Clarke, 2020).

4.5 Ethical considerations

Adherence to ethical conduct such as obtaining due permission for collecting data,
communicating the purpose of the study, respect of privacy and honesty in data collection
and analysis was ensured in both phases of the study. The data collection instruments were
anonymous, and no inferences have been drawn regarding the individual firm. During the
interview stage, the right of participants to withdraw from the study at any time was
mentioned. Interviewees were acknowledged for their participation in the study and
requested if they wanted to receive the key findings of the study.

5. Results
5.1 Questionnaire survey findings
5.1.1 Managerial understanding of corporate social responsibility. Table 3 portrays the
aggregated understanding of Nepalese managers vis-
a-vis different approaches to CSR along
with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients and the significance level of the S–W test for different
constructs.
As shown in Table 3, the mean values attached to various approaches of CSR indicate
that Nepalese managers largely agree on the notions of corporate philanthropy, stakeholder
approach and political CSR. Likewise, managers moderately accept the ideas of constrained
profit-making and the triple bottom line approaches. However, they seem still uncertain
about the notion of CSV approach. However, they refute the idea that businesses are purely
profit-making entities.
5.1.2 Managerial understanding of corporate social responsibility by the firm’s size. First,
the homogeneity of variance for each of the three groups – small, medium and large firms –
was tested before performing one-way ANOVA. The results confirmed that the assumptions
of homogeneity of variance were true for all constructs. Then, mean values for each of the
three groups were obtained against all constructs, and a one-way ANOVA test was
performed to find out the differences in managerial understanding of CSR by the firm’s size
as shown in Table 4. The table also shows the effect size (h2) whenever statistical
significance in the difference between means was observed (p < 0.05).
Table 4 reveals that there is a significant difference in managerial understanding of CSR
vis-
a-vis the pure profit-making approach, constrained profit-making approach, corporate

Mean One-way ANOVA results

Approaches to corporate social responsibility Small Medium Large F-statistic p-value Eta squared (h2)

Pure profit-making approach 2.59 2.35 2.28 6.515 0.002 0.073

Constrained profit-making approach 3.48 3.74 3.40 7.515 0.001 0.083
Corporate philanthropy 3.28 3.70 3.98 29.538 0.000 0.263 Table 4.
Stakeholder approach 3.65 3.57 3.67 0.334 0.716 –
Managerial
Triple bottom line approach 3.18 3.40 3.53 8.798 0.000 0.096
Creating shared value (CSV) approach 3.02 3.07 3.15 0.979 0.378 –
understanding of
Political corporate social responsibility (PCSR) 3.08 3.59 4.01 107.921 0.000 0.566 corporate social
responsibility by the
Source: Calculations by the authors from the data files firm’s size
IJLMA philanthropy, triple bottom line approach and political CSR for small, medium and large
firms.
Despite reaching statistical significance, the differences in means between small, medium
and large firms were not the same for all constructs. The magnitudes of difference were
medium for the pure profit-making approach, constrained profit-making approach and triple
bottom line approach whereas the differences were large for corporate philanthropy and
political CSR as indicated by the values of eta squared.
The post hoc analyses of the differences in means showed that perceptions regarding the
pure profit-making approach and triple bottom line approach were significantly different
between small and large firms. Managerial understanding vis-
a-vis constrained profit-making
approach was significantly different between small and medium firms as well as between
medium and large firms. The perceptions of managers regarding corporate philanthropy and
political CSR were significantly different between all groups – small and medium firms, small
and large firms and medium and large firms. Notably, with the increase in the firm’s size,
managers perceived the philanthropic and political responsibilities of business more
favorably.

5.2 Interview findings

The semistructured interviews revealed a variety of perceptions held by the managers
regarding the responsibilities of business toward society. The probing questions during the
interviews helped to dig deep into the actual connotation of CSR held by the managers.
Analysis of the interview data indicated that Nepalese managers typically understand CSR
in line with the essence of corporate philanthropy, stakeholder approach and political
CSR. For instance, the following remarks exemplify the different subthemes within the
philanthropic approach of CSR:
So far I understand, it (CSR) is an unselfish action designed to promote the welfare of society [. . .]
I mean companies are required to give something – in cash or kind – to society or needy people
without any condition. Sometimes, we have to forget about profits. We need to do at least
something for society even without profit. If social activities are guided by the profit motive, it is
again a business – not a social responsibility (C1, large firm).

We need to give something back to the society in which we operate. But, first of all, we should be
financially sound or profitable [. . .] then only the company can contribute something to society.
Ultimately, we are paid for doing business. Thus, profit first, then only social needs (C9, medium
firm).

Responsibility of business towards society is concerned with contributing to society or

community. But, it should be done such that the brand image and reputation of the business are
also promoted. It should create faith in the institution among stakeholders [. . .] and the general
public, and ensure sustainability (C2, large firm).
Interestingly, one respondent said: “Most people equate CSR with philanthropy. But, I think
it is totally different. It is all about responding to stakeholder needs. The idea of CSR is a
brilliant one; when we support our stakeholders, they support us back” (C11, small firm).
Another respondent said, “CSR is all about practicing good governance. If we do business
following the governance guidelines and ethics, all will be well. Doing business unfairly and
contributing a nominal amount of money to social causes is an act of cheating” (C4, small
firm).
The political responsibility of companies was also clearly evident during the interview.
A respondent from a large manufacturing and processing firm said: “The role of business in
society should go beyond traditional philanthropy. The private sector’s role in peace- Managerial
building, combating corruption, and helping the government in delivering public goods is understanding
extremely important in the country context like Nepal” (C15, large firm).
However, only a small percentage of respondents portrayed their views in line with the
essence of the constrained profit-making approach, governance approach, CSV approach
and environmental sustainability approach. Table 5 presents a summary of themes that
emerged from the interview data regarding the responsibilities of business towards society.
Managers had diverse perceptions regarding whether CSR is integral to core business
functions. One respondent pointed out that CSR could be both bolt-in and built-in. He said:
When we donate to needy people such as flood victims, it is isolated; when we use LED lights to
save energy and reduce electricity bills, it is integrated; and when we plant trees on the way to our
hotel, it is difficult to say whether isolated or integrated. He further added, “it may undergo
particularly the three different stages [. . .] stage 1: engage in philanthropic activities, stage 2:
promoting ethics, governance and internal efficiency, and stage 3: engage in public deliberations
as well as collaborating with other companies, NGOs, and the government to create value at a
larger scale and for all concerned” (C18, large firm).
CEO of Company C6 (small firm) argued that “core business and CSR are like curry and salt
[. . .] they are not separable; CSR adds value to core business like salt does to curry.” But,
surprisingly, only about one-third of respondents argued CSR as an integral aspect of
business strategy and operations and the rest of the respondents claimed CSR as an activity
isolated from core business functions. Only one interview participant agreed that CSR is
both a built-in and bolt-in issue for businesses.
In sum, the interview data largely supported the questionnaire findings, uncovered vivid
aspects of managerial beliefs as well as institutional realities and provided deeper insights
into the managerial understanding of CSR in Nepal.

6. Discussion
The questionnaire survey and interview results demonstrated a widespread managerial
understanding of CSR ranging from the socioculturally rooted approach of giving back to
society to the relatively recently emerged political roles of business in the Nepalese context.
Interview results also largely substantiated the questionnaire findings by highlighting the
notions of corporate philanthropy, stakeholder approach, political CSR and constrained
profit-making approach, respectively. In addition, interview findings also revealed vivid
dimensions under philanthropic, stakeholder and political CSR perspectives.
The results largely corroborate with the findings of Pedersen and Neergaard (2009) as
well as Aribi and Arun (2015). They found that managers had a thorough and vivid
understanding of CSR including corporate philanthropy, attending to stakeholder concerns
and participating in solving national and global social problems. However, the study
findings greatly contradict the findings of Fitzpatrick (2000) as well as Wong and Kim
(2023) who found that managerial understanding of CSR was characterized by ethical
business behavior, financial performance and legal compliance rather than philanthropic
activities. Likewise, the findings of this study partly confirm and partly contradict many
other studies including Pastrana and Sriramesh (2014) and Galob et al. (2018). For instance,
Galob et al. found that Turkish and Slovenian managers tended to equate CSR with
corporate philanthropy as well as stakeholder concerns but refuted the idea of political
engagement of businesses.
The results of this study may be attributed to a wide range of factors. The emphasis
toward philanthropic CSR may have been influenced by the cultural tradition of giving back
to society (Sthapit, 2021) and the religious beliefs among Nepalese people of the potential
 society
IJLMA

Table 5.

regarding the

business toward
Emerged themes

responsibilities of
Main theme Subthemes Central idea Frequency

Philanthropic approach
Stakeholder approach
Political CSR
Constrained profit-making approach
Governance approach
Creating shared value (CSV) approach
Environmental sustainability approach
Altruistic philanthropy An unselfish and unconditional giving designed to promote the 5
good of society
Conditional philanthropy Contribute to social causes only when adequate profit is made 13
or slack resources are available
Strategic philanthropy/cause- Contribute to philanthropic activities in such a way that it 7
related marketing generates publicity, enhances brand image and increases the
revenue flow
Morally-guided stakeholder Do no harm to stakeholders and fulfill their prudent interests 15
approach
Strategically-guided stakeholder Fulfill the expectations of key stakeholders to enhance business 9
approach competitiveness and mitigate stakeholder pressures
Public deliberations Engage in public deliberations for making collective decisions 5
for the benefit of society
Cross-sector collaboration Enter into collaboration with different sectors/actors of society 4
mainly to give a scalable impact
Helping the government Helping the government in peace-building, combating 9
corruption and providing public goods whenever necessary
– Maximize profit and create employment opportunities without 7
violating the legal provisions as well as ethical standards
– Regulate and control business in an efficient, accountable and 5
transparent manner
– Make decisions and take actions in such a way that it creates 2
additional value for both business and society
– Meeting the needs of business and society without destroying 3
the life-supporting ecosystem on which we depend

Source: Excerpts from the authors' qualitative data files

reward someone will enjoy after his/her death (in heaven) if he/she makes some Managerial
philanthropic contributions (Legal, 2006). Likewise, attention to stakeholder concerns may understanding
be attributed to the fact that responding to stakeholder needs is also in the interest of the
business itself as evident in one interview response, “[. . .] when we support our
stakeholders, they support us back” (C11). Scholars also argue that the stakeholder
perspective provides a holistic way of managing organizations and responsibility toward
stakeholders is also a fiduciary duty of managers (Freeman, 1984; Goyal, 2022).
Despite the debatable legitimacy of political CSR (Maier and Gilbert, 2022), the reasons
behind the acceptance of political roles of business in society in the Nepalese context can be
mainly twofold: state level and society level. Nepal experienced a long period of hostility and
turbulence on the political front after the mid-1990s and it is among the least developed
countries in the world. Since the governments of poor countries, like Nepal, have limited
resources and capacities to solve social problems and fill governance gaps (Pedersen and
Jeppesen, 2015), managers might have argued the active participation of business even in
the political arena including combating corruption and providing public goods whenever
necessary. As a matter of fact, The Constitution of Nepal, 2015 has conferred 31
fundamental rights but these provisions have not been complemented by sustainable socio-
economic development. For instance, while The Constitution of Nepal, 2015 states education
and health as fundamental rights, functional institutional mechanisms to guarantee these
rights do not exist (Bajracharya et al., 2019). Likewise, social values and norms as well as
unmet societal expectations may also trigger the managerial perception of the need for
corporate political and social engagement, particularly in developing and least-developed
country contexts (Bradly and Nathan, 2019).
Interestingly, most of the survey respondents disagreed with the pure profit-making
approach and none of the interview participants supported this idea. Hence, Nepalese
managers have rejected Carr’s (1968) proposition about the role of business in society. It is
consistent with the idea that the traditional separation between achieving economic
efficiency and social goals is no longer valid in today’s business world (Chapagain, 2019;
Mayer, 2021; Porter and Kramer, 2006).
It is also noteworthy to mention that various subthemes emerged within corporate
philanthropy, stakeholder approach and political CSR during the interviews, which
facilitated the deeper meaning of CSR held by the managers. Findings revealed that
managers widely hold the concepts of postprofit-making philanthropy than strategic
philanthropy, a morally-guided stakeholder approach than a strategically-guided
stakeholder approach and helping the government in fulfilling the developmental and
governance gaps than engaging in public deliberations. Likewise, most managers regarded
CSR as a practice isolated from core business strategy and operations. Thus, it is obvious
that Nepalese managers appreciate CSR as mostly an external agenda, and the moral
perspective is more widely held than strategic. One of the main reasons for the concept of
postprofit philanthropy may be the impression derived from recent government regulation
of mandatory spending on CSR based on the annual net profit of companies. Likewise, past
research evidence in other country contexts also demonstrates that low-individualism
culture is generally associated with moral imperatives than high-individualism cultures
(Witt and Redding, 2012). However, given that these findings are based on the ideas of a
limited number of interview participants, the interview results should be used for a deeper
understanding of the phenomenon rather than for generalizations.
Despite the relevance of sociocultural, religious, political–legal and economic contexts,
managerial understanding of CSR may also be influenced by several other factors including
managerial values (Turker and Ozmen, 2018); demographic background and personality of
IJLMA managers (Quazi, 2003); firm’s size in which they belong (Cincalova and Hedija, 2020); and
stakeholder expectations as well as the firm’s resources at hand (Perez-Batres et al., 2012). It
is also important to consider that organizations are complex adaptive systems (Cunha,
2022), and, hence, managerial understanding, attitudes and behavior vis-
a-vis CSR may
change over time to manage dynamic and complex relationships with different stakeholders.
This study also examined the influence of the firm’s size on the managerial
understanding of CSR. Statistically speaking, philanthropic and political responsibilities
were highly regarded by the larger firms than the smaller ones, but no significant difference
was observed regarding managerial understanding vis-
a-vis stakeholder approach and CSV
approach. Among the seven different approaches to CSR (see Table 4), managers from small,
medium and large firms were most inclined toward the stakeholder approach, constrained
profit-making approach and political CSR, respectively. A similar pattern was observed in
the semistructured interviews as well.
The finding of this study regarding the managerial understanding of CSR by the firm’s
size concerning corporate philanthropy is consistent with the findings of Brammer and
Millington (2006) who found that firms’ engagement in philanthropic activities increased
with the increase in their size. Favorable perceptions of larger firms regarding corporate
philanthropy may be attributed to the fact that larger firms generally have more capacities
to recognize social issues, a culture of shared responsibility and slack financial resources to
engage in philanthropic activities (Lepoutre and Heene, 2006). Similarly, positive views of
large firms toward political CSR found in this study are consistent with the argument that
large firms have more reasons to approach political CSR compared with SMEs (Hoivik and
Mele, 2009).
The main reasons for larger firms to get involved in political CSR might be the various
instrumental motives such as the desire to bring public policy changes that are congruent
with their corporate goals (Scherer, 2017; Valente and Crane, 2010), to gain legitimacy
among different stakeholders (Chedrawi et al., 2020; Matten and Moon, 2020) and to prevent
protectionist barriers (Bittar-Godinho and Masiero, 2019). However, these results may have
to be interpreted with caution. This is because it is also possible that large firms often talk
the language of CSR even if socially responsible aspirations are not deeply rooted in their
attitude and behavior (Ting, 2021). On the contrary, considering small and medium-sized
firms’ economic vulnerability, it is logical to expect that they place high importance on
economic performance through better stakeholder relations and legal compliance (Sweeney,
2009).

7. Conclusion
The purpose of this study is to provide an updated managerial understanding of CSR in the
unique research context of Nepal. To this end, the results indicated that managerial
understanding of CSR in Nepal is no longer limited to a single epitome of business and
society relationships. Instead, the managerial understanding of CSR in Nepal is mainly
characterized by the notions of corporate philanthropy, stakeholder approach, political CSR
and constrained profit-making approach. Thus, the results have underlined the relevance of
both traditional and emerging roles of business in society. However, these findings do not
equally apply to firms of all sizes. The idea of political CSR and corporate philanthropy are
strongly held in large firms whereas these ideas are not widely accepted in small firms. This
finding has great practical as well as theoretical significance in Nepal and other similar
country contexts as the differences are not only statistically significant but also the effect
sizes measured through eta squared (h2) are very large (see Table 4). However, the
stakeholder approach was largely agreed upon by managers regardless of their firms’ size.
 Interestingly, interview results have validated survey findings in addition to the Managerial
revelation of vivid dimensions under those widely accepted approaches – philanthropic understanding
approach, stakeholder approach and political CSR. The interview findings have highlighted
the fact that the same phenomenon, such as corporate philanthropy, may have different
connotations. In Nepal, corporate philanthropy is understood as altruistic, conditional or
strategic but “conditional philanthropy” is more widely held.
Taken together, these results suggest that the new paradigm of CSR for Nepal and other
similar country contexts can be the combination of culturally-rooted corporate philanthropy,
morally and strategically underpinned stakeholder approach and sociopolitically required
political CSR. The most striking result to emerge from the analysis is that today’s business
managers regard themselves as the stewards of not only the shareholders but also the
society and the government at large. This paradigm of CSR can be particularly relevant for
developing and least developed countries where the government alone may not be able to
meet pressing social needs and fill the governance gaps to establish a prosperous and
balanced society.

7.1 Theoretical, practical and policy implications

The study has certain implications for theory, managerial practice and public policy. From a
theoretical perspective, the findings demonstrate that the notion of CSR is influenced by
both country contexts and organizational factors, such as firm size, and, hence, it is difficult
to provide a standard definition of CSR. However, a broad framework of CSR can be
suggested that can be flexibly interpreted without dropping some common core elements.
For instance, the results suggest that the stakeholder approach can be regarded as a
common core element of CSR for all companies, but large companies should additionally
consider political and philanthropic responsibilities as their important responsibilities
toward society. Given that the study is conducted in the Nepalese context, the results may be
generalized to the Nepalese context and highly relevant to similar country contexts such as
India, but they must be treated with utmost caution in other dissimilar country contexts.
From a practical viewpoint, the results imply that managers should be prepared for
embracing diverse roles to be good stewards of both business and society. This calls for
adequate institutional arrangements such as a CSR governance mechanism, written
guidelines on CSR policies and project execution and appropriate platforms for interacting
with the government and other stakeholders.
Policymakers can use informational, fiscal-economic, legal and partnering instruments
considering the managerial understanding of CSR. For instance, the government can use
informational instruments to highlight the importance of new approaches, such as the CSV
and triple bottom line approaches, which are not adequately recognized by the managers.
Likewise, since large firms largely agree on philanthropic and political CSR, fiscal-economic
incentives can be provided, or partnering instruments can be used for undertaking large
social or environmental projects. The government and policymakers can modify the existing
legal provisions, such as the specific areas of mandatory CSR spending, or develop
customized guidelines based on the managerial understanding of CSR vis-
a-vis firm size
rather than relying on a single standard that does not fit all.

7.2 Limitations and directions for future research

Despite its contributions to the literature, the study has certain limitations pointing to
interesting avenues for future research. Future researchers can take a larger sample size and
do cross-country comparisons for making the study more robust and generalizable in a
broader context. Besides the firm’s size, other firm characteristics such as the type of
IJLMA ownership, industry sector and firm’s profitability can be considered while analyzing the
managerial understanding of CSR. Moreover, an assessment of the understanding of CSR
from key stakeholder groups and experts in the field could provide additional insights for
drawing implications for both public policy and corporate practice. Since CSR is essentially
a contested concept (Mitnick et al., 2021), future researchers can continue to do research
studies in this domain considering changing theoretical perspectives and contextual
realities.

References
Abdul Rashid, M.Z. and Ibrahim, S. (2002), “Executive and management attitudes towards corporate
social responsibility in Malaysia”, Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business
in Society, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 10-16, doi: 10.1108/14720700210447641.
Adhikari, D.R., Gautam, D.K. and Chaudhari, M.K. (2016), “Corporate social responsibility domains and
related activities in Nepalese companies”, International Journal of Law and Management, Vol. 58
No. 6, pp. 673-684, doi: 10.1108/IJLMA-08-2015-0044.
Andrews, F.E. (1952), Corporation Giving, Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick.
Aribi, Z.A. and Arun, T. (2015), “Corporate social responsibility and Islamic financial institutions (IFIs):
management perceptions from IFIs in Bahrain”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 129 No. 4, doi:
10.1007/s10551-014-2132-9.
Athanasopoulou, A. (2012), “Managers’ corporate social responsibility perceptions and attitudes across
different organizational contexts within the non-profit – for-profit organizational continuum”,
Journal of Change Management, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 467-494, doi: 10.1080/14697017.2012.728770.
Bajracharya, P., Manandhar, M.D. and Bajracharya, R. (2019), Nepal’s Economy in Disarray, Adroit
Publishers, New Delhi.
Baniya, R. and Rajak, K. (2020), “Attitude, motivation and barriers for CSR engagement among travel
and tour operators in Nepal”, Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Education, Vol. 10, pp. 53-70,
doi: 10.3126/jthe.v10i0.28733.
Bernard, H.R. (2013), Social Research Methods: qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, Sage, New
York, NY.
Bittar-Godinho, J.S. and Masiero, G. (2019), “Political CSR and legitimation via corporate foundation: a
public management program”, Social Responsibility Journal, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 553-570, doi:
10.1108/SRJ-02-2018-0053.
Bowen, H.R. (1953), Social Responsibility of the Businessman, Harper and Row, New York, NY.
Bradly, A. and Nathan, G. (2019), “Institutional CSR: provision of public goods in developing
economies”, Social Responsibility Journal, Vol. 15 No. 7, pp. 874-887, doi: 10.1108/SRJ-01-2018-
0019.
Brammer, S. and Millington, A. (2006), “Firm size, organizational visibility and corporate philanthropy:
an empirical analysis”, Business Ethics: A European Review, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 6-18, doi: 10.1111/
j.1467-8608.2006.00424.x.
Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006), “Using thematic analysis in psychology”, Qualitative Research in
Psychology, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 77-101, doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2013), Successful Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide for Beginners, Sage,
London.
Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2019a), “Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis”, Qualitative Research in
Sport, Exercise and Health, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 589-597, doi: 10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806.
Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2019b), “To saturate or not to saturate? Questioning data saturation as a
useful concept for thematic analysis and sample-size rationales”, Qualitative Research in Sport,
Exercise and Health, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 1-16, doi: 10.1080/2159676X.2019.1704846.
Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2020), “Can I use TA? Should I use TA? Should I not use TA? Comparing Managerial
reflexive thematic analysis and other pattern-based qualitative analytic approaches”,
Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 1-11, doi: 10.1002/capr.12360.
understanding
Bryman, A. and Bell, E. (2011), Business Research Methods, 3rd ed., Oxford University Press, London.
Bu, M., Rotchadl, S. and Bu, M. (2022), “A comparative analysis of corporate social responsibility
development in the USA and China”, Critical Perspectives on International Business, Vol. 19
No. 1, doi: 10.1108/cpoib-09-2021-0073.
Carr, A.Z. (1968), “Is business bluffing ethical?”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 1, pp. 143-153.
Carroll, A.B. (1979), “A three dimensional conceptual model of corporate social performance”, The
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 497-505, doi: 10.5465/amr.1979.4498296.
Carroll, A.B. (1991), “The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: toward the moral management of
organizational stakeholders”, Business Horizons, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 39-48, doi: 10.1016/0007-6813
(91)90005-g.
Carroll, A.B. (1999), “Corporate social responsibility: evolution of a definitional construct”, Business and
Society, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 268-295, doi: 10.1177/000765039903800303.
Chapagain, B.R. (2008), “Management views on corporate social responsibility in commercial banks of
Nepal”, Socio-Economic Development Panorama, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 119-129.
Chapagain, B.R. (2019), “Does corporate social responsibility pay off? A verification of the North
American postulation in the Nepalese context”, Journal of Management and Development
Economics, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 1-17.
Chapagain, B.R. (2020), “Status of corporate social responsibility practices in Nepal”, Quest Journal of
Management and Social Sciences, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 1-20, doi: 10.3126/qjmss.v2i1.29012.
Chedrawi, C., Osta, A. and Osta, S. (2020), “CSR in the Lebanese banking sector: a neo-institutional
approach to stakeholders’ legitimacy”, Journal of Asia Business Studies, Vol. 14 No. 2,
pp. 143-157, doi: 10.1108/JABS-03-2018-0093.
Cincalova, S. and Hedija, V. (2020), “Firm characteristics and corporate social responsibility: the case of
Czech transportation and storage industry”, Sustainability, Vol. 12 No. 5, p. 1992, doi: 10.3390/
su12051992.
Cohen, J.W. (1988), Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed., Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.
Creswell, J.W. (2012), Educational Research: Planning, Conducting and Evaluating Quantitative and
Qualitative Research, 4th ed., Pearson, Boston.
Cunha, M.P. (2022), “Rethinking organizations and society from paradoxes”, Organizações and
Sociedade, Vol. 29 No. 100, pp. 195-216, doi: 10.1590/1984-92302022v29n0008EN.
Czaja, R. and Blair, J. (2005), Designing Surveys: A Guide to Decisions and Procedures, 2nd ed., Sage,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
Davenport, K. (2000), “Corporate citizenship: a stakeholder approach for defining corporate social
performance and identifying measures for assessing it”, Business and Society, Vol. 39 No. 2,
pp. 210-219, doi: 10.1177/000765030003900205.
Ehrnström-Fuentes, M. and Böhm, S. (2023), “The political ontology of corporate social responsibility:
obscuring the pluriverse in place”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 185 No. 2, pp. 245-261, doi:
10.1007/s10551-022-05175-1.
Elembilassery, V. (2023), “Evolutionary influences on corporate social responsibility literature: a review
and prognosis”, Society and Business Review, Vol. 18 No. 3, doi: 10.1108/SBR-05-2022-0136.
Elkington, J. (1997), Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business, Oxford, Capstone.
Fernandez-Gamez, M.Á., Gutierrez-Ruiz, A.M., Becerra-Vicario, R. and Ruiz-Palomo, D. (2019), “The
effects of creating shared value on the hotel performance”, Sustainability, Vol. 11 No. 6, p. 1784,
doi: 10.3390/su11061784.
IJLMA Fisher, D.M. and Law, R.D. (2021), “How to choose a measure of resilience: an organizing framework for
resilience measurement”, Applied Psychology, Vol. 70 No. 2, pp. 643-673, doi: 10.1111/apps.12243.
Fitzpatrick, K. (2000), “CEO views on corporate social responsibility”, Corporate Reputation Review,
Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 292-302, doi: 10.1057/palgrave.crr.1540121.
Francis, J.J., Johnston, M., Robertson, C., Glidewell, L., Entwistle, V., Eccles, M.P. and Grimshaw, J.M.
(2010), “What is an adequate sample size? Operationalising data saturation for theory-based
interview studies”, Psychology and Health, Vol. 25 No. 10, pp. 1229-1245, doi: 10.1080/08870440
903194015.
Freeman, R.E. (1984), Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach, Pitman, Boston, MA.
Freeman, I. and Hasnaoui, A. (2011), “The meaning of corporate social responsibility: the vision of four
nations”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 100 No. 3, pp. 419-443, doi: 10.1007/s10551-010-0688-6.
Friedman, M. (1970), “A Friedman doctrine: the social responsibility of business is to increase its
profits”, The New York Times Magazine, 13 September, p. 126.
Galob, U., Turkel, S., Kronegger, L. and Uzunoglu, E. (2018), “Uncovering CSR meaning networks: a
cross-national comparison of Turkey and Slovenia”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 44 No. 4,
pp. 433-443, doi: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.05.003.
Gautam, D.K. and Gautam, P.K. (2023), “Stress and resilience to migrant entrepreneur-managers of
small and medium enterprises during COVID-19 pandemic”, Benchmarking: An International
Journal, doi: 10.1108/BIJ-06-2022-0400.
Gautam, T., van Dick, R. and Wanger, U. (2001), “Organizational commitment in Nepalese settings”,
Asian Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 239-248, doi: 10.1111/1467-839x.00088.
Goyal, L. (2022), “Stakeholder theory: revisiting the origins”, Journal of Public Affairs, Vol. 22 No. 3, doi:
10.1002/pa.2559.
Guest, G., Bunce, A. and Johnson, L. (2006), “How many interviews are enough?: an experiment with data
saturation and variability”, Field Methods, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 59-82, doi: 10.1177/1525822x05279903.
Hoivik, H.W. and Mele, D. (2009), “Can an SME become a global corporate citizen? Evidence from a case
study”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 88 No. 3, pp. 551-563, doi: 10.1007/s10551-009-0123-z.
Ivankova, N.V. and Stick, S.L. (2007), “Students’ persistence in a distributed doctoral program in
educational leadership in higher education: a mixed methods study”, Research in Higher
Education, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 93-135, doi: 10.1007/s11162-006-9025-4.
Karadag, O. and Aktas, S. (2012), “Optimal sample size determination for ANOVA designs”,
International Journal of Applied Mathematics and Statistics, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 127-134.
Khan, M., Lockhart, J. and Bathurst, R. (2021), “The institutional analysis of CSR: learnings from an emerging
country”, Emerging Markets Review, Vol. 46, p. 100752, doi: 10.1016/j.ememar.2020.100752.
Koch, F. (1979), The New Corporate Philanthropy, Plenum Publishing Corporation, New York, NY.
Krejcie, R.V. and Morgan, D.W. (1970), “Determining sample size for research activities”, Educational
and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 607-610, doi: 10.1177/001316447003000308.
L. Kane, V., Akbari, M., Nguyen, L.L.H. and Nguyen, T.Q. (2022), “Corporate social responsibility in
Vietnam: views from corporate and NGO executives”, Social Responsibility Journal, Vol. 18 No. 2,
pp. 316-347, doi: 10.1108/SRJ-10-2020-0434.,
Lantos, G.P. (2001), “The boundaries of strategic corporate social responsibility”, Journal of Consumer
Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 7, pp. 595-630, doi: 10.1108/07363760110410281.
Legal, P.R. (2006), “Corporate social responsibility: a review of practices in Nepal”, Paper presented in a
seminar organized by Economic Forum Nepal (EFON), Kathmandu, December. http://prithviligal.
com/wp-content/report/csr_seminar.pdf
Lepoutre, J. and Heene, A. (2006), “Investigating the impact of firm size on small business social
responsibility: a critical review”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 67 No. 3, pp. 257-273, doi:
10.1007/s10551-006-9183-5.
Lincoln, Y.S. and Guba, E.G. (1985), Naturalistic Inquiry, Sage, New York, NY. Managerial
Maier, A.L. and Gilbert, D.U. (2022), “Deliberating with the autocrats? A case study on the limitations understanding
and potential of political CSR in a non-democratic context”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 184
No. 1, doi: 10.1007/s10551-022-05139-5.
Matten, D. and Crane, A. (2005), “Corporate citizenship: toward an extended theoretical
conceptualization”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 166-179, doi: 10.2307/
20159101.
Matten, D. and Moon, J. (2008), “‘Implicit’ and ‘explicit’ CSR: a conceptual framework for a comparative
understanding of corporate social responsibility”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 33
No. 2, pp. 404-424, doi: 10.5465/AMR.2008.31193458.
Matten, D. and Moon, J. (2020), “Reflections on the 2018 decade award: the meaning and dynamics of
corporate social responsibility”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 7-28, doi:
10.5465/amr.2019.0348.
Mayer, C. (2021), “The future of the corporation and the economics of purpose”, Journal of Management
Studies, Vol. 58 No. 3, pp. 887-901, doi: 10.1111/joms.12660.
Ministry of Industry, Commerce and Supplies (2022), “Industrial enterprise rules, 2078”, Nepal Gazette,
Section 71, No. 55, pp. 43-45.
Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs (2020), “Act made for amending and integrating
industrial enterprise related law, 2076”, Nepal Gazette, Act No. 19, Section 54, pp. 47-48.
Mitnick, B.M., Windsor, D. and Wood, D.J. (2021), “CSR: undertheorized or essentially contested?”,
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 623-629, doi: 10.5465/amr.2020.0239.
Nepal Law Commission (2015), “The constitution of Nepal”, available at: https://lawcommission.gov.
np/en/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Constitution-of-Nepal.pdf
Nepal Rastra Bank (2021), “Unified directives”, available at: www.nrb.org.np/contents/uploads/2021/
11/Unified-Directives-2078-1.pdf
Nunnally, J.C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Onwuegbuzie, A.J. and Collins, K.M.T. (2007), “A typology of mixed methods sampling designs in
social science research”, The Qualitative Report, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 281-316.
Pastrana, N.A. and Sriramesh, K. (2014), “Corporate social responsibility: perceptions and practices
among SMEs in Colombia”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 14-24, doi: 10.1016/j.
pubrev.2013.10.002.
Patton, M.Q. (2002), Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, 3rd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Patton, M.Q. (2014), Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, 4th ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Pedersen, E.R. (2010), “Modelling CSR: how managers understand the responsibilities of business towards
society”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 91 No. 2, pp. 155-166, doi: 10.1007/s10551-009-0078-0.
Pedersen, E.R.G. and Jeppesen, S. (2015), “CSR and suppliers”, in Pedersen E.R.G. (Ed.), Corporate Social
Responsibility, Sage, London, pp. 143-165.
Pedersen, E.R. and Neergaard, P. (2009), “What matters to managers? The whats, whys, and hows of
corporate social responsibility in multinational corporation”, Management Decision, Vol. 47
No. 8, pp. 1261-1280, doi: 10.1108/00251740910984532.
Perez-Batres, L.A., Doh, J.P., Miller, V.V. and Pisani, M.J. (2012), “Stakeholder pressures as
determinants of CSR strategic choice: why do firms choose symbolic versus substantive self-
regulatory codes of conduct?”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 110 No. 2, pp. 157-172, doi:
10.1007/s10551-012-1419-y.
Porter, M.E. and Kramer, M.R. (2006), “Strategy and society: the link between competitive advantage
and corporate social responsibility”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 23, pp. 78-92.
Porter, M.E. and Kramer, M.R. (2011), “Creating shared value: how to reinvent capitalism and unleash a
wave of innovation and growth”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 1, pp. 62-77.
IJLMA Pratihari, S.K. and Uzma, S.H. (2020), “A survey on bankers’ perception of corporate social
responsibility in India”, Social Responsibility Journal, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 225-253, doi: 10.1108/SRJ-
11-2016-0198.
Quartey, S.H. and Quartey, E.H. (2015), “Institutional stakeholder-driven corporate social responsibility
understanding and practices among managers: the case of Ghana’s high-risk industries”,
International Journal of Business and Management, Vol. 10 No. 7, pp. 145-157, doi: 10.5539/ijbm.
v10n7p145.
Quazi, A.M. (2003), “Identifying the determinants of corporate managers’ perceived social obligations”,
Management Decision, Vol. 41 No. 9, pp. 822-831, doi: 10.1108/00251740310488999.
Sandelowski, M. and Leeman, J. (2012), “Writing usable qualitative health research findings”,
Qualitative Health Research, Vol. 22 No. 10, pp. 1404-1413, doi: 10.1177/1049732312450368.
Sastry, T. (2011), “Exploring the role of business in society”, IIMB Management Review, Vol. 23 No. 4,
pp. 246-256, doi: 10.1016/j.iimb.2011.08.005.
Sawyer, S.F. (2009), “Analysis of variance: the fundamental concepts”, Journal of Manual and
Manipulative Therapy, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 27E-38E, doi: 10.1179/jmt.2009.17.2.27E.
Scherer, A.G. (2017), “Theory assessment and agenda setting in political CSR: a critical theory
perspective”, International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 1-24, doi: 10.1111/
ijmr.12137.
Scherer, A.G. and Palazzo, G. (2011), “The new political role of business in a globalized world: a review
of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance, and democracy”,
Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 48 No. 4, pp. 899-931, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00950.x.
Scherer, A.G., Rasche, A., Palazzo, G. and Spicer, A. (2016), “Managing for political social responsibility:
new challenges and directions for PCSR 2.0”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 53 No. 3,
pp. 273-298, doi: 10.1111/joms.12203.
Sekaran, U. and Bougie, R. (2016), Research Methods for Business: A Skill-Building Approach, 7th ed.,
John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY.
Silberhorn, D. and Warren, R.C. (2007), “Defining corporate social responsibility: a view from big
companies in Germany and the UK”, European Business Review, Vol. 19 No. 5, pp. 352-372, doi:
10.1108/09555340710818950.
Skouloudis, A., Avlonitis, G.J., Malesios, C. and Evangelinos, K. (2015), “Priorities and perceptions of
corporate social responsibility: insights from the perspective of Greek business professionals”,
Management Decision, Vol. 53 No. 2, pp. 375-401, doi: 10.1108/MD-12-2013-0637.
Srnka, K.J. and Koeszegi, S.T. (2007), “From words to numbers: how to transform qualitative data into
meaningful quantitative results”, Schmalenbach Business Review, Vol. 59 No. 1, pp. 29-57.
Sthapit, A. (2021), “Corporate social responsibility in Nepal”, in Idowu, S.O. (Ed.), Current Global
Practices of Corporate Social Responsibility. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics and Governance,
Springer, Cham, pp. 777-800, doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-68386-3_36.
Sweeney, L. (2009), “A study of current practice of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and an
examination of the relationship between CSR and financial performance using structural
equation modeling (SEM)”, Unpublished doctoral thesis, Dublin Institute of Technology, Dublin.
Tashakkori, A. and Teddlie, C. (1998), “Mixed methodology: combining qualitative and quantitative
approaches”, Applied Social Research Methods Series, Vol. 46, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Tavakol, M. and Dennick, R. (2011), “Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha”, International Journal of
Medical Education, Vol. 2, pp. 53-55, doi: 10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd.
Tilt, C.A. (2016), “Corporate social responsibility research: the importance of context”, International
Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 1-9, doi: 10.1186/s40991-016-0003-7.
Ting, P.H. (2021), “Do large firms just talk corporate social responsibility? The evidence from CSR
report disclosure”, Finance Research Letters, Vol. 38, p. 101476, doi: 10.1016/j.frl.2020.101476.
Tortosa-Edo, V. and Lopez-Navarro, M.Á. (2021), “How do perceived CPA and political CSR interact in Managerial
their relationships with citizens’ trust in companies?”, Social Responsibility Journal, Vol. 17 No. 8,
pp. 1232-1250, doi: 10.1108/SRJ-09-2019-0294. understanding
Turker, D. and Ozmen, Y.S. (2018), “Grounding managerial values towards social responsibility on an
ideological framework”, Social Responsibility Journal, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 516-526, doi: 10.1108/SRJ-
02-2017-0034.
Valente, M. and Crane, A. (2010), “Public responsibility and private enterprise in developing countries”,
California Management Review, Vol. 52 No. 3, pp. 52-78, doi: 10.1525/cmr.2010.52.3.52.
Visser, W. (2008), “Corporate social responsibility in developing countries”, in Crane, A. McWilliams, A.
Matten, D. Moon J. and Siegel D.S. (Eds), The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social
Responsibility, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, pp. 473-499.
Windsor, D. (2006), “Corporate social responsibility: three key approaches”, Journal of Management
Studies, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 93-114, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00584.x.
Witt, M.A. and Redding, G. (2012), “The spirits of corporate social responsibility: senior executive
perceptions of the role of the firm in society in Germany, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea and the
USA”, Socio-Economic Review, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 109-134, doi: 10.1093/ser/mwr026.
Wong, A.K.F. and Kim, S. (. (2023), “Corporate social responsibility (CSR) and internal consequences: the
moderating role of employees’ position levels”, SAGE Open, Vol. 13 No. 1, p. 21582440231151565,
doi: 10.1177/21582440231151565.
Zikmund, W.G., Babin, B.J., Carr, J.C., Adhikari, A. and Griffin, M. (2013), Business Research Methods:
A South-Asian Perspective, 8th ed., Cengage Learning, Delhi.

Further reading
Carroll, A.B. (2006), “Corporate social responsibility: a historical perspective”, in Epstein M.J. and
Hanson K.O. (Eds), The Accountable Corporation, Praeger Publishers, Westport, CT, pp. 3-30.

Corresponding author
Bal Ram Chapagain can be contacted at: balram.chapagain@cdm.tu.edu.np

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

View publication stats