SUSTAINABLE PRODUCT, SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION AND THE CASE OF ARÇELİK

Öz

Sustainability is more important than ever. In this context, companies carry out various corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities. The effects of these activities on stakeholders arouse interest both in the literature and in practice. However, the limited number of studies on CSR news and the fact that none of them cover product and production process news determined the purpose of this study. The study aims to determine the sustainable product and production news of Arçelik, one of the strongest brands in Turkey, and to investigate their effects on its firm value. In this context, scanning all Arçelik news in the Dünya Newspaper without a time limit yielded a hand-collected sample of 23 news articles. The impacts of these news were tested via event study methodology. According to the results, negative news induces a negative reaction as expected. Positive news may have a positive effect when featuring the first-time event while does not cause an effect on subsequent similar events. Additionally, canvassing other corporate news around CSR news dates reveals two unfavorable earning announcements which also explains the negative response to two positive news.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sustainable Product
• Sustainable Production
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Event Study Methodology
• Arçelik

SÜRDÜRÜLEBİLİR ÜRÜN, SÜRDÜRÜLEBİLİR ÜRETİM VE ARÇELİK ÖRNEĞİ

Öz

Sürdürülebilirlik hiç olmadığı kadar önem kazanmıştır. Firmalar da bu kapsamda çeşitli kurumsal sosyal sorumluluk (KSS) faaliyetleri gerçekleştirmektedir. Bu faaliyetlerin paydaşlar üzerindeki etkileri ise hem yazında hem uygulamada ilgi uyandırmaktadır. Buna karşın KSS haberleri ile ilgili çok kısıtlı sayıda çalışma bulunması ve bunların hiçbirinin ürün ve üretim süreç haberlerini kapsamaması bu çalışmanın amacını belirlemiştir. Çalışmada Türkiye’nin en güçlü markalarından olan Arçelik’in sürdürülebilir ürün ve üretim haberlerinin tespit edilip bunların firma değeri üzerindeki etkilerinin araştırılması amaçlanmıştır. Bu kapsamda Dünya Gazetesinde tüm zamanları kapsayan bir haber taraması yapılmış ve ulaşılan 23 haberin etkisi olay çalışması yöntemi ile test edilmiştir. Elde edilen sonuçlara göre olumsuz haberin olumsuz bir tepkiye neden olduğu, olumlu haberlerin özellik bakımından ilk olması durumunda olumlu bir etki yaratabildiği, takip eden benzer olayların bir etkiye sebep olmadığı görülmüştür. Bununla birlikte sadece iki olumlu haber için olumsuz tepki gözlemlenmiştir. Bütün KSS haberleri öncesinde medyada yer alan diğer tüm haberler incelendiğinde sadece ilgili iki KSS haberi öncesinde kar düşüş haberlerine rastlanmış olup olumsuz etki bununla açıklanabilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sürdürülebilir Ürün
• Sürdürülebilir Üretim
• Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluk
• Olay Çalışması Yöntemi
• Arçelik

Kaynakça

1. Albuquerque, R., Koskinen, Y., & Zhang, C. (2018). Corporate social responsibility and firm risk: Theory and empirical evidence. Management Science, 65(10), 4451–4469. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2018.3043
2. Allouche, J., & Laroche, P. (2005). A meta-analytical investigation of the relationship between corporate social and financial performance. Revue de Gestion des Ressources Humaines, (57), 18.
3. Arias Fogliano de Souza Cunha, F., & Samanez, C. P. (2013). Performance analysis of sustainable investments in the Brazilian stock market: A study about the corporate sustainability index (ISE). Journal of Business Ethics, 117(1), 19–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1484-2.
4. Ateş, S. (2021). Kurumsal sosyal performansa piyasa tepkisi: BIST örneği. Muhasebe ve Finansman Dergisi, (90), 149–164. https://doi.org/10.25095/mufad.827626.
5. Baker, B., Derfler-Rozin, R., Pitesa, M., & Johnson, M. (2019). Stock market responses to unethical behavior in organizations: An organizational context model. Organization Science, 30(2), 319–336. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2018.1244.
6. Bangsa, A. B., & Schlegelmilch, B. B. (2020). Linking sustainable product attributes and consumer decision-making: Insights from a systematic review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 245, 118902.
7. Bénabou, R., & Tirole, J. (2010). Individual and corporate social responsibility. Economica, 77(305), 1–19. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0335.2009.00843.x.
8. Bhattacharya, A., Good, V., & Sardashti, H. (2020). Doing good when times are bad: the impact of CSR on brands during recessions. European Journal of Marketing, 54(9), 2049–2077. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-01-2019-0088.

9. Blaufus, K., Möhlmann, A., & Schwäbe, A. N. (2019). Stock price reactions to news about corporate tax avoidance and evasion. Journal of Economic Psychology, 72, 278–292. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2019.04.007.
10. Bofinger, Y., Heyden, K. J., & Rock, B. (2022). Corporate social responsibility and market efficiency: Evidence from ESG and misvaluation measures. Journal of Banking & Finance, 134, 106322. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2021.106322.
11. Boyle, E. J., Higgins, M. M., & Rhee, G. S. (1997). Stock market reaction to ethical initiatives of defense contractors: Theory and evidence. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 8(6), 541–561. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1006/cpac.1997.0124.
12. Brammer, S., & Millington, A. (2008). Does it pay to be different? An analysis of the relationship between corporate social and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 29(12), 1325–1343. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.714.
13. Brooks, C., Godfrey, C., Hillenbrand, C., & Money, K. (2016). Do investors care about corporate taxes? Journal of Corporate Finance, 38, 218–248. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2016.01.013.
14. Bryman, A. (2008). Why do researchers integrate/combine/mesh/blend/mix/merge/fuse quantitative and qualitative research. Advances in mixed methods research, 87–100.
15. Byun, S. K., & Oh, J.-M. (2018). Local corporate social responsibility, media coverage, and shareholder value. Journal of Banking & Finance, 87, 68–86. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2017.09.010.
16. Capelle-Blancard, G., & Petit, A. (2019). Every little helps? ESG news and stock market reaction. Journal of Business Ethics, 157(2), 543–565. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3667-3.
17. Carley, K. M. (1997). Extracting team mental models through textual analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18(S1), 533–558. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199711)18:1+<533::AID-JOB906>3.0.CO;2-3.
18. Chen, Y., Ganesan, S., & Liu, Y. (2009). Does a firm's product-recall strategy affect its financial value? An examination of strategic alternatives during product-harm crises. Journal of Marketing, 73(6), 214-226.
19. Choi, Y. H., Park, H. J., & Choi, S. (2018). Impact of emotional harassment on firm’s value. Frontiers in Psychology. https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02333.
20. Daub, C., & Ergenzinger, R. (2005). Enabling sustainable management through a new multi‐disciplinary concept of customer satisfaction. European Journal of Marketing, 39(9/10), 998–1012. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560510610680.
21. de Medeiros, J. F., Ribeiro, J. L. D., & Cortimiglia, M. N. (2014). Success factors for environmentally sustainable product innovation: A systematic literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 65, 76–86. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.08.035.
22. Dorobantu, S., Henisz, W. J., & Nartey, L. (2017). Not all sparks light a fire: Stakeholder and shareholder reactions to critical events in contested markets. Administrative Science Quarterly, 62(3), 561–597. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839216687743.
23. Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2007). Reaping relational rewards from corporate social responsibility: The role of competitive positioning. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 24(3), 224–241. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2007.01.001.
24. Duriau, V. J., Reger, R. K., & Pfarrer, M. D. (2007). A content analysis of the content analysis literature in organization studies: Research themes, data sources, and methodological refinements. Organizational research methods, 10(1), 5–34.
25. Edmans, A. (2011). Does the stock market fully value intangibles? Employee satisfaction and equity prices. Journal of Financial Economics, 101(3), 621–640. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2011.03.021.
26. Eilert, M., Jayachandran, S., Kalaignanam, K., & Swartz, T. A. (2017). Does it pay to recall your product early ? An empirical investigation in the automobile industry, Journal of Marketing, 81(3), 111-129. https://doi.org/10.1509/jm.15.0074.
27. Fama, E. F. (1970). Efficient capital markets: A review of theory and empirical work. The Journal of Finance, 25(2), 383–417. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1970.tb00518.x.
28. Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Agency problems and residual claims. The Journal of Law and Economics, 26(2), 327-349.
29. Fang, L., & Peress, J. (2009). Media coverage and the cross-section of stock returns. The Journal of Finance, 64(5), 2023–2052. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2009.01493.x.
30. Flammer, C. (2013). Corporate social responsibility and shareholder reaction: The environmental awareness of investors. Academy of Management Journal, 56(3), 758–781. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0744.
31. Friedman, M. (1970). A theoretical framework for monetary analysis. Journal of Political Economy, 78(2), 193–238.
32. Gephart, R. P. (1993). The textual approach: Risk and blame in disaster sensemaking. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1465–1514. https://doi.org/10.5465/256819.
33. Godfrey, P. C., Merrill, C. B., & Hansen, J. M. (2009). The relationship between corporate social responsibility and shareholder value: An empirical test of the risk management hypothesis. Strategic Management Journal, 30(4), 425–445. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.750.
34. González Sánchez, M., & Morales de Vega, M. E. (2018). Corporate reputation and firms’ performance: Evidence from Spain. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 25(6), 1231–1245. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1634.
35. Habel, J., Schons, L. M., Alavi, S., & Wieseke, J. (2016). Warm glow or extra charge? The ambivalent effect of corporate social responsibility Activities on customers’ perceived price fairness. Journal of Marketing, 80(1), 84–105. https://doi.org/10.1509/jm.14.0389.
36. Huff, A. S. (1990). Mapping strategic thought. John Wiley & Sons Incorporated. Kabanoff, B. (1996). Computers can read as well as count: How computer aided text analysis can benefit organisational research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 1986-1998.
37. Kalaignanam, K., Kushwaha, T., Steenkamp, J. B. E., & Tuli, K. R. (2013). The effect of CRM outsourcing on shareholder value: A contingency perspective. Management Science, 59(3), 748-769.
38. King, B. G., & Soule, S. A. (2007). Social movements as extra-institutional entrepreneurs: The effect of protests on stock price returns. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(3), 413–442. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.52.3.413.
39. Klassen, R. D., & McLaughlin, C. P. (1996). The impact of environmental management on firm performance. Management Science, 42(8), 1199–1214. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.42.8.1199.
40. Krüger, P. (2015). Corporate goodness and shareholder wealth. Journal of Financial Economics, 115(2), 304–329. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2014.09.008.
41. Kumar, B., Manrai, A. K., & Manrai, L. A. (2017). Purchasing behaviour for environmentally sustainable products: A conceptual framework and empirical study. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 34, 1-9.
42. Kumar, V. (2015). Evolution of marketing as a discipline: What has happened and what to look out for. Journal of Marketing, 79(1), 1-9
43. Lacey, R., Kennett-Hensel, P. A., & Manolis, C. (2015). Is corporate social responsibility a motivator or hygiene factor? Insights into its bivalent nature. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(3), 315–332.
44. Liang, H., & Renneboog, L. (2020). Corporate social responsibility and sustainable finance: A review of the literature. European Corporate Governance Institute–Finance Working Paper, (701).
45. Lins, K. V., Servaes, H., & Tamayo, A. (2017). Social capital, trust, and firm performance: The value of corporate social responsibility during the financial crisis. Journal of Finance, 72(4). https://doi.org/10.1111/jofi.12505.
46. Luo, X., Wang, H., Raithel, S., & Zheng, Q. (2015). Corporate social performance, analyst stock recommendations, and firm future returns. Strategic Management Journal, 36(1), 123–136. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2219.
47. MacKinlay, A. C. (1997). Event studies in economics and finance. Journal of Economic Literature, 35(1), 13–39.
48. Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 268–305. https://doi.org/10.2307/3556659
49. Masulis, R. W., & Reza, S. W. (2015). Agency problems of corporate philanthropy. The Review of Financial Studies, 28(2), 592–636. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhu082.
50. McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 117–127. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2001.4011987.
51. Muller, A., & Kräussl, R. (2011). The value of corporate philanthropy during times of crisis: The sensegiving effect of employee involvement. Journal of Business Ethics, 103(2), 203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0861-6.
52. Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). Defining content analysis. Content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
53. Olsen, M. C., Slotegraaf, R. J., & Chandukala, S. R. (2014). Green claims and message frames: how green new products change brand attitude. Journal of Marketing, 78(5), 119-137.
54. Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24(3), 403–441. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840603024003910.
55. Özdemir, A. İ. (2004). Tedarik zinciri yönetiminin gelişimi, süreçleri ve yararları. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, (23).
56. Rost, K., & Ehrmann, T. (2017). Reporting biases in empirical management research: The example of win-win corporate social responsibility. Business & Society, 56(6), 840–888. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650315572858.
57. Schuler, D. A., & Cording, M. (2006). A corporate social performance–corporate financial performance behavioral model for consumers. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 540–558. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2006.21318916.
58. Schumpeter, J. A. (1939). Business cycles (Vol. 1). McGraw-Hill New York.
59. Sen, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Korschun, D. (2006). The role of corporate social responsibility in strengthening multiple stakeholder relationships: A field experiment. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 158–166. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070305284978.
60. Shapiro, G., & Markoff, G. (1997). Methods for drawing statistical inferences from text and transcripts. Text analysis for the social sciences, 9–31.
61. Shiu, Y.-M., & Yang, S.-L. (2017). Does engagement in corporate social responsibility provide strategic insurance-like effects? Strategic Management Journal, 38(2), 455–470. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2494.
62. Sorescu, A., Warren, N. L., & Ertekin, L. (2017). Event study methodology in the marketing literature: an overview. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45(2), 186–207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-017-0516-y.
63. Stäbler, S., & Fischer, M. (2020). When does corporate social irresponsibility become news? Evidence from more than 1,000 brand transgressions across five countries. Journal of Marketing, 84(3), 46–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242920911907.
64. Szőcs, I., Schlegelmilch, B. B., Rusch, T., & Shamma, H. M. (2016). Linking cause assessment, corporate philanthropy, and corporate reputation. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44(3), 376-396.
65. Vishwanathan, P., van Oosterhout, H. (J. ., Heugens, P. P. M. A. R., Duran, P., & van Essen, M. (2020). Strategic CSR: A concept building meta-analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 57(2), 314–350. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12514.
66. Wang, H., Gibson, C., & Zander, U. (2020). Editors’ Comments: Is research on corporate social responsibility undertheorized? Academy of Management Review, 45(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2019.0450.
67. Woodrum, E. (1984). “Mainstreaming” content analysis in social science: Methodological advantages, obstacles, and solutions. Social Science Research, 13(1), 1–19.
68. Yen, M.-F., Shiu, Y.-M., & Wang, C.-F. (2019). Socially responsible investment returns and news: Evidence from Asia. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(6), 1565–1578. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1833.
69. Zhang, J., Djajadikerta, H. G., & Zhang, Z. (2018). Does sustainability engagement affect stock return volatility? Evidence from the Chinese financial market. Sustainability (Switzerland), 10(10), 3361. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103361.
70. T.C. Ticaret Bakanlığı, (2021), Yeşil Mutabakat Eylem Planı. Retrieved from https://ticaret.gov.tr/data/60f1200013b876eb28421b23/MUTABAKAT%20YEŞİL.pdf.