Abstract
Purpose
Using the strategic orientation concept of Miles and Snow, the purpose of this paper is to test if differences in levels of corporate social responsibility (CSR) exist between prospectors, defenders, analyzers, and reactors.
Design/methodology/approach
The method included a purpose‐designed survey sent to CEOs. To explore differences in CSR and strategy types, one‐way ANOVA with contrast effect analysis was used.
Findings
The results suggest that differences in levels of CSR do exist between strategy types. Prospectors and defenders demonstrated higher levels of CSR than analyzers. As expected, reactors demonstrated the lowest levels of CSR.
Research limitations/implications
This paper suggests that while institutions appear to be placing increasing demands on firms to demonstrate socially responsible behavior, not all firms demonstrate CSR equally. How firms approach competitive markets and the characteristics that shape how they adapt to the environment – or strategic orientation – appears to be a factor that explains differing levels of CSR.
Practical implications
Firms' strategic orientation might be important to the demonstration of CSR; therefore, understanding the internal dynamics and characteristics of different strategy types will afford managers a better understanding of strategies that are needed to more effectively engage in CSR.
Originality/value
The value of the paper rests in exploring, for the first time, if differences in CSR exist between the Miles and Snow strategy typology. The current study puts forth statistical evidence that differences do exist, thus building on a rich body of research aimed at understanding the impact of strategic orientation on organizational outcomes.