Fu, L.Boehe, D.Orlitzky, M.Swanson, D.L.2025-12-182025-12-182019Long Range Planning, 2019; 52(6, article no. 101847):1-130024-6301https://hdl.handle.net/11541.2/140001Why do some firms ignore some stakeholders while courting others? We propose two key drivers of firms' social postures and derive from this analysis a novel typology of corporate social performance (CSP) profiles. Although we expect that other drivers exist, we argue that a useful starting point for understanding any given CSP profile is to consider the pressure exerted on an organization by its stakeholders in conjunction with its level of resource endowment. Our preliminary typology identifies six distinct CSP profiles that reflect different opportunities and risks for stakeholder management: the CSP Vanguard, Opportunist, Generalist, Minimalist, Specialist, and Laggard. All else equal, the first two CSP profiles imply more nonmarket opportunities than risk, whereas we expect Laggards and Specialists to face greater risk in their responses to social and environmental issues. According to our framework, Generalists and Minimalists probably operate between these two extremes of business risk. Our conceptual analysis seeks to advance research and practice for more strategic stakeholder management.enCopyright 2018 Elseviercorporate social performance (CSP)corporate social posturecorporate social responsibilityCSP profileinstrumental stakeholder theory (IST)organizational resourcesstakeholder managementJournal article10.1016/j.lrp.2018.08.0022-s2.0-85074607025