Page 78

AD ALTA

JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH

was excluded from the model as correlation between variables
Q44 and Q43 was nearly 1.0. Item Q44 anti-corruption policies
and item Q43 internal code of conduct have very high
correlation – meaning topic of anti-corruption is already covered
by internal code of conduct. Having a closer look backwards on
the first construct (Q43), loading values for this item are among
the lowest. For Austria, it has one of the three lowest values, for
Slovakia it even got below cut-off value of 0.7 (only 0.583). In
the Czech Republic, loading value could be considered high
enough (0.915) but it is still the 5

Table 10 – Summary of results of hypothesis testing

lowest out of 25 items in the

first construct. For the abovementioned reasons, H3 can be also
considered as confirmed.

Hypothesis

Result

Supported

High correlation coefficients among all three

constructs of the model.

Supported

Items measuring explicit CSR activities were

excluded due to low loading values.

Supported

Item measuring implementation of special CSR

policy and implementation of internal code of

conduct were proved to be less significant.

Source: author`s own

5 Conclusion

SMEs have a unique status in the economy of any state. In the
studied CEE region (Austria, Czech Republic and Slovakia) they
represent more than 99% of all existing enterprises, create more
than 80% of jobs and are substantial contributors to GDP.
However, their nature itself is slightly different than those of
large companies. They are more flexible but also more fragile to
turbulences on the market so their approach and way of doing
business also has to be different. Whatever works for large
companies doesn`t have to work for SMEs. They need easy,
straightforward and effective solutions for all the areas of the
business. CSR is not an exception. Setup of complicated models,
implementation and development of pre-defined metrics, vast
reporting and in general, structured approach to CSR might be
an asset but is very costly and time consuming, thus, can be
considered as ineffective for SMEs who usually have neither the
resources nor the time to apply it. However, this doesn`t mean
SMEs cannot be comparably responsible business entities.
Consequently, route of SMEs to sustainable and responsible
business doesn`t lead via complicated models but through
innovation.

In order to stay competitive and survive on today`s demanding,
turbulent and ever changing markets, SMEs have to be
innovative. There is no other choice. Innovation can only work if
the equation Innovation = Idea + Realization (Schrage, 2004) is
kept. Only such a product or service can be considered an
innovation that market (customers and stakeholders) will accept.
The pressure from customers and stakeholder on CSR is
increasing. The result still remains important but the way of
achieving it is not left behind (Guenster et al., 2011; El Ghoul et.
al, 2017; Kim, Krishna, Danesh, 2019).

Innovation and CSR are two interconnected variables that cannot
exist one without another. As shown by statistical analysis of the
empirical data in this study, innovative SMEs don`t need to
explicitly concentrate on CSR – its specific activities, policies,
metrics, reporting or code of conducts. The answer for SMEs is
in the business strategy, innovation and sustainable business
model. This way, CSR can be strategic in its core and what is the
most important, also proactive not just reactive. In the upcoming
potentially deepest economic crisis in human history, this will be
even more true. Innovation will be the key for survival more
than ever before. Implementation of CSR via innovation and
innovating via CSR might bring SMEs who are very fragile in its
nature more resilience, more potential business opportunties,
offer more flexibility to industries and lead to a more
collaborative business environment.

Literature:

1. Anser, K. M., Zhang, Z., Kanwal, L. (2017). Moderating
effect of innovation on corporate social responsibility and firm
performance in realm of sustainable development. Corporate
Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 25(5),
799-806. doi: 10.1002/csr.1495
2. Arend, R. J. (2014): Social and Environmental Performance at
SMEs: Considering Motivations, Capabilities, and
Instrumentalism. Journal of Business Ethics, 125(4), 541-561.
doi: 10.1007/s10551-013-1934-5
3. Arlow, P., Gannon, M. (1982): Social Responsiveness,
Corporate Structure, and Economic Performance. Academy of
Management, 7(2), 235 – 241.
4. Baden, D. A., Harwood, I. A., Woodward, D. G. (2009): The
effect of buyer pressure on suppliers in SMEs to demonstrate
CSR practices: An added incentive or counter-productive?
European Management Journal, 27(6), 429-441.
5. Barnard, C. (1958): Elementary Conditions of Business
Morals. California Management Review, 1(1), 1-13.
6. Baumgartner, R. J., Ebner, D. (2010): Corporate sustainability
strategies: sustainability profiles and maturity levels. Sustainable
Development, 18(2), s. 76-89.
7. Bocquet, R., Le Bas, CH., Mothe, C., Poussing, N. (2017):
CSR, Innovation, and Firm Performance in Sluggish Growth
Contexts: A Firm-Level Empirical Analysis. Journal of Business
Ethics, 146(1), 241-254.
8. Carroll, A.B. (1999): Corporate Social Responsibility:
Evolution of a Definitional Construct. Business & Society,
38(3), 268-295.
9. Christensen, L. J., Mackey, A., Whetten, D. (2014): Taking
Responsibility for Corporate Social Responsibility: The Role of
Leaders in Creating, Implementing, Sustaining, or Avoiding
Socially Responsible Firm Behaviors. Academy of Management
Perspectives, 28(2), 164–178.
10. Coombs, W. T., Holloday, S. (2015): CSR as crisis risk:
Expanding how we conceptualize the relationship. Corporate
Communication, 20(2), 144-166.
11. Davis, K., Blomstrom, R. L. (1975): Business and society:
Environment and responsibility (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-
Hill. ISBN 0070155240
12. Dawkins, J., Lewis, S. (2003): CSR in stakeholder
expectations and their implication for company strategy. Journal
of Business Ethics, 44(2), 185-193.
13. Dragulescu, A., Cole Arendt, C. (2018): xlsx: Read, Write,
Format Excel 2007 and Excel 97/2000/XP/2003 Files. R package
version 0.6.1. <https://CRAN.R-project.org/pac kage=xlsx>.
14. El Ghoul, S., Guedhami, O., Kim, Y. (2017): Country-level
institutions, firm value, and the role of corporate social
responsibility initiatives. Journal of International Business
Studies, 48, 360-385.
15. Elkington, J. (1994): Towards the sustainable corporation –
win-win-win business strategies for sustainable development.
California Management Review, 36(2), 90-100.
16. EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2017): Non-financial reporting.
<https://ec.europa.eu/info/business-economy-euro/company-reporting-
and-auditing/company-reporting/non-financial-reporting_en>.
17. Fan, X., Thompson, B., Wang, L. (1999): Effects of Sample Size,
Estimation Methods, and Model Specification on Structural Equation
Modeling Fit Indexes. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 56-83.
18. Ferrando, A., Marchica, M.T., Mura, R. (2014): Financial
Flexibility Across the Euro Area and the UK (January 20, 2014).
ECB Working Paper No. 1630. https://ssrn.com/abs tract=2381833
19. Gáborová. I. (2020): Influence of Innovation Activities on
CSR of SMEs in Selected CEE Countries. AD ALTA: Journal of
Interdisciplinary Research, 10(1), 70-81.
20. Gelbmann, U. (2010): Establishing Strategic CSR in SMEs:
an Austrian CSR Quality Seal to Substantiate the Strategic CSR
Performance. Sustainable Development, 18(3), 90-98.
21. Gossling, T. (2011): Corporate Social Responsibility and
Business Performance. Theories and Evidence about
Organizational Responsibility. London: Edward Elgar
Publishing. ISBN 978-0857-9323-89.
22. Guenster, N., Baurer, R., Derwall, J., Koedijk, K. (2005):
The Economic Value of Corporate Eco-Efficiency. European
Financial Management, 17(4), 679-704.

- 78 -