Since the mid 1990s, the momentum behind Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has increased. CSR has become an important issue at political, academic and business level. Already since the beginning of the last decade, commentators have suggested that CSR seems to differ between European countries and that said differences appear to be shaped by the country context. Nevertheless, in general, so far, only few empirical cross-country studies have been conducted. In addition, said studies focused mainly on the comparison between Europe as a region and the US. The latter are biased by the selection of only few specific European countries, which are regarded as a proxy for Europe as a whole. Hence, said studies deliver partially contradictory results, since they do not consider that CRS is supposed to be Non-Pan-European. Moreover, cross-country studies of international character, going beyond that regional comparison, have been rather superficial in view of CSR issues to be investigated. And finally, only recently, cross-country research in CSR has started to establish a systematic link between CSR patterns and the country specific institutional context. Also in view of the latter, the focus has been set on the comparison between countries of Anglo American/Saxon tradition and Europe, considering again some specific European countries as a proxy for the region as a whole. <p>Given that lack in the literature, the following explicit calls for empirical cross-country research of CSR in Europe have been formulated: First, to explore differences in view of CSR; and second, to find out if country specific institutional mechanisms are influential in shaping said differences. <p><p>Hence, the dissertation aims at filling this gap and to answer said calls for research by presenting a cross-country research involving two European countries, Germany and Spain. The research aims at exploring differences in view of a variety of CSR issues and at finding out if the national institutional contexts are influential in shaping said differences. <p><p>The dissertation consists of five main parts. In part one, the introductory part, the following is pointed out: motivation, main theoretical frameworks of CSR and main CSR issues in CSR literature. Moreover, a detailed overview on the research design of the three papers, which form part two, three and four, is provided. <p><p>In part two, which is composed of one paper, differences in view of CSR concepts and CSR drivers (analytical framework) between Germany and Spain are explored. The methodology applied was a questionnaire-based postal survey among the 500 largest companies in both, Germany and Spain. <p>The results of the study suggest important differences between the two countries over the analytical framework. In comparison to Spanish companies, the German ones seem to be more attached to the "sustainability" concept of CSR, whereas the Spanish companies favour to a major extent the CSR concept, formulated by the EC and the "Triple Bottom Line" concept. In view of CSR drivers, the results imply that German corporations are to a major extent than their Spanish counterparts driven by secondary stakeholders, whereas corporations in both countries seem to be equally pressured by primary stakeholders to become engaged in CSR. In addition, the findings suggest that CSR in Spain seems to be more "voluntary", whereas, in Germany, it seems to be more "regulated". The analysis of the results with regard to "expectations on positive internal" and "positive external effects" as drivers to CSR suggests a "more competitive advantage centred" approach to CSR among Spanish companies than among German ones, where the corresponding approach is "less competitive advantage centred". And finally, the findungs further suggest, that the country context seems to be influential in shaping most of said differences. <p><p>Part three, which consists of one paper, deals with CSR reporting, which is assumed to deliver insights into the institutionalization of the leading reporting guidelines in CSR, the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) guidelines, CSR agendas and the communicated rationale behind CSR. The methodology applied was quantitative contents analysis of CSR reports. As sample served companies of the utility industry, listed in the main stock indexes in Germany and Spain. <p>The findings of the study suggest that the institutionalisation of the GRI indicators is low in the corporations investigated in both countries. But, it is especially low in German firms. With regard to CSR agendas, the focus of corporate activities appears to lie among German corporations on those attached to environmental responsibilities, whereas Spanish corporations appear to have in this regard a mixed approach, related to their economic, environmental and social responsibilities. But, in contrast to their German counterparts the economic responsibilities are more emphasized. With regard to the communicated rationale behind CSR, German corporations seem to be driven by normative reasons, the Spanish to a major extent by instrumental ones. And finally, the findings imply that the country context seems to be influential in shaping most of said differences. <p><p>In part four, which contains one paper, differences in the understanding of CG in view of its links to CSR are explored. Currently, scholars discuss the link between CG and CSR and their relational models in the theoretical literature. Hence, to explore the understanding of CG and its links to CSR ,an analytical framework was elaborated, based upon said current theoretical debate. The methodology applied was qualitative contents analysis, conducted in the framework of a web site research. The sample consisted of corporations listed in the main stock indexes in both countries. <p>The findings suggest differences between the two countries with regard to the understanding of CG and its links to CSR and the corresponding relational models. In Spain the understanding of CG seems to be to a major extent linked to the "narrow view" of CG, implied by a major focus on shareholders only in view of corporate responsibilities. In contrast, among German corporations the view appears to be "broad", including other stakeholders than exclusively shareholders in this regard. In addition, the results suggest, that the relational model favoured by German corporations consists of CSR being considered as a part of CG, whereas the Spanish companies seem to relate CG to CSR or at least consider both, CG and CSR, as complementary constituents. And finally, the findings suggest that most of the exposed differences seem to be shaped by mechanisms of the traditional national CG systems. <p><p>In the final main part, part five, the overall conclusions of the dissertation have been formulated. These can be summarized as follows. From an overall perspective the three essays contribute to fill the lack in the literature as already pointed out. They constitute an original answer to the calls for research expressed in this regard. Moreover, they contribute to increase the knowledge on differences in CSR between European countries. And furthermore, through paying attention to country specific institutional mechanisms, they enhance the understanding of said differences induced by the country context or country specificity of CSR. In addition, the three essays have raised important implications for managerial practice, public policies, international and (supra) national institutions and for further research. In view of the implications for managerial practice, the findings suggest to sensitize practitioners with regard to the country specificity of CSR and to undertake corresponding measures in e.g. corporate communication, product and market strategies, employer marketing and organizational and management development terms. With regard to the implications for public policies, international and (supra) national organizations, those with regulatory power should increasingly bear in mind to handle more carefully the outsourcing of said power to private institutions, including NGOs, which play an important role in the "oluntary" regulation of CSR. In addition, those institutions, without regulatory power, which issue e.g. voluntary guidelines, should consider the country specificity of CSR and the "one size does not fit all" problem. Concerning the implications of the findings for further research these are the following: 1) to expand the CSR issues to be investigated in cross-country studies; 2) to intensify cross-country research in Europe in view of the number of countries involved; 3) to consider longitudinal approaches in cross-country research in Europe; 4) to expand said research (1-3) also to SMEs; 5) to increase the scope of institutional mechanisms to be investigated; and 6) to intensify cross-country linguistics research in view of CG and CSR. And finally, the findings of the three essays have delivered substantial contributions to enliven the debate, at academic and practitioner level, in view of the international management of CSR in terms of complexity vs. simplicity. <p> / Doctorat en Sciences économiques et de gestion / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished