Corporate social responsibility in foreign and Lithuanian capital companies

Alfonsas Laurinavičius, Martynas Vaičiulis


This paper is oriented at foreign and Lithuanian capital companies based in Lithuania and the differences between their social responsibility and predominant management types. The research conducted in this paper is based on the public opinion that leads to believing that foreign capital business entities are far more ahead that Lithuanian capital companies as far as corporate social responsibility (CSR) is concerned, and the fact that there is no solid ground to confirm this assumption.

The results of the research revealed that the differences do exist, but they are not as vast as the society thinks. It was established that Lithuanian capital companies still lack a fully developed understanding of CSR, meaning that they are still a bit less socially responsible than foreign capital entities, because the idea of CSR is relatively new in the country. Nevertheless, a promising tendency leads to believing that CSR is steadily gaining its significance in the Lithuanian business world.


Corporate social responsibility (CSR); management type; foreign capital; Lithuanian capital; conceptual model

Full Text:



Aaronson, S.A. (2005). “Minding our business”: What the United States Government has done and can do to ensure that U.S. multinationals act responsibly in foreign markets. Journal of Business Ethics, 59(1/2): 175-198.

Alas, R., Ennulo, J., and Türnpuu, L. (2006). Managerial values in the institutional context. Journal of Business Ethics, 65(3): 269-278.

Alas, R., and Rees, C. (2006). Work-related attitudes, values and radical change in post-socialist contexts: A Comparative study. Journal of Business Ethics, 68(2): 181-189.

Alas, R., and Sun, W. (2008). Institutional impact on work related values in Chinese organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(2): 297-306.

Blowfield, M., and Frynas, J. (2005). Setting new agendas: Critical perspective on corporate social responsibility in the developing world. International Affairs, 81(3): 499-513.

Carroll, A.B.A. (1979). Three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4): 497-505.

Carroll, A.B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4): 39-48.

Carroll, A.B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business & Society, 38(3): 268-295.

Carroll, A.B, and Shabana, K.M. (2010). The business case for corporate social responsibility: A Review of concepts, research and practice. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1): 85-105.

Crane, A., and Matten, D. (2007). Business ethics: Managing corporate citizenship and sustainability in the age of globalization (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

Davis, J.H., and Ruhe, J.A. (2003). Perception of country corruption: antecedents and outcomes. Journal of Business Ethics, 43(4): 275-288.

European Commission. (2011). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. A renewed EU strategy 2011-14 for Corporate Social Responsibility. Retrieved December 2, 2013 from

Lantos, G.P. (2001). The boundaries of strategic corporate social responsibility. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(7): 595-630.

Mačys, G., and Vijeikis, J. (2010). Does the social relationship matter? The corporate social responsibility. African Journal of Political Science and International Relations, 4(8): 308-318.

Marinetto, M. (1999). The history development of business philanthropy: Social responsibility in the new corporate economy. Business History, 41(4): 1-20.

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, 33(2): 404-424.

Mintzberg, H. (1983). The case for corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Strategy, 4(2): 3-15.

Mueller, K., Hattrup, K., Spiess, S.O., and Lin-Hi, N. (2012). The effects of corporate social responsibility on employees’ affective commitment: A Cross-cultural investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(6): 1186-1200.

EuroVoc. 2013. Corporate social responsibility. Retrieved on December 2, 2013 from

Quazi, A.M., and O’Brien, D. (2000). An empirical test of a cross-national model of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 25(1): 33-51.

Government of the Republic of Lithuania. (2010). Resolution on National corporate social responsibility development program in 2009-2013 and action plan on measures promoting corporate social responsibility in Lithuania in 2009-2011. Retrieved on December 2, 2013 from

Schwartz, M.S., and Carroll, A.B. (2003). Corporate social responsibility: A Three-domain approach. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(4): 503-530.

Taras, V., Steel, P., and Kirkman, B.L. (2011). Three decades of research on national culture in the workplace: Do the differences still make a difference? Organizational Dynamics, 40(3): 189-198.

Ubius, U., and Alas, R. (2009). Organizational culture types as predictors of corporate social responsibility. Engineering Economics, 61(1): 90-99.

Unerman, J., and O’Dwyer, B. (2006). Theorizing accountability for NGO advocacy. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 19(3): 349-376.

Vilkė, R. (2011). Corporate social responsibility implementation effectiveness improvement in Lithuanian: Model of local government involvement. Vilnius: Mykolas Romeris University.

Žitkus, L., and Junevičius, A. (2007). Boundaries of possible solutions of management problems caused by cultural interaction. Engineering Economics, 51(1): 44-49.

Waddoc, S. (2004). Companies, academics and the progress of corporate citizenship. Business and Society Review, 109(1): 5-42.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

"Business Systems & Economics" ISSN online 2029-8234