Published Apr 24, 2019
Asma Mohammed Bahurmoz


Although there is no agreed upon universal definition of corporate social responsibility (CSR), organizations are often ranked in terms of their CSR performance. However, two glaring gaps have been identified in the CSR literature. First, evaluation methodologies are questionable and often lack a scientific basis and second, stakeholder representation is not made explicit or is missing altogether. This paper contributes to the CSR literature by constructing a CSR index based on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), as well as ensuring that stakeholder judgments are an integral part of the constructed index. Furthermore, the developed index is implemented to measure CSR performance in a business setting. An AHP-based CSR index is developed for the services sector in Saudi Arabia to serve as a case study. The developed index is used to measure CSR performance in over forty corporations. The paper adds to the existing literature by providing insight into how the Saudi corporations perceive and practice CSR. It concludes that a systematic usage of the developed AHP-based CSR index would facilitate corporations to adopt a more responsible and measurable behavior, while it offers government institutions the option to rank corporations in terms of their CSR practices in a scientific and transparent manner.

How to Cite

Bahurmoz, A. M. (2019). MEASURING CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY PERFORMANCE: A COMPREHENSIVE AHP BASED INDEX. International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, 11(1), 20–41.


Download data is not yet available.
Abstract 1296 | PDF Downloads 356



AHP, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), CSR performance, group decision making, Saudi Arabia, services sector

Bahurmoz A, Mukhtar, Al-Sharqi L. (2015). AHP as an effective consensus-based selection tool: a case of personnel selection for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Saudi Arabia. Journal for Global Business Advancement, 8(2), 138-156. Doi:

Bari? A (2017). Corporate social responsibility and stakeholders: Review of the last decade (2006-2015). Business Systems Research 8 (1), 133-146. Doi:

Bowen H R (1953). Social responsibilities of the businessman. New York, Harper & Row. Doi: 10.2307/j.ctt20q1w8f

Bowen EH & Haire M (1975). A strategic posture towards corporate social responsibility. California Management Review, 18, 49-58. Doi:

Carroll, AB (1979). A three-dimensional concept model of corporate performance, Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497-505. Doi: 10.2307/257850

Chen X, Huang R, Yang Z, Dube L. (2018). CSR types and the moderating role of corporate competence. European Journal of Marketing, 52 (7/8), 1358-1386. Doi:

Commission of the European Communities. (2001). Promoting a European framework for Corporate Social Responsibility. COM, 366, Brussels. Doi:

Costa, Menichini (2013). A multidimensional approach for CSR assessment: The importance of the stakeholder perception. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(1), 150–161. Doi:

Devinney T. (2009). Is the socially responsible corporation a myth? The good, the bad, and the ugly of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23, 44-56. Doi:

Fontaine M. (2013). Corporate social responsibility and sustainability: The new bottom line. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 4(40), 110-119.

General Authority of Statistics, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia:

Hemat H, Yuksel U (2014). A critical review of corporate social responsibility practices from a marketing perspective: is cause-related marketing really a ‘win–win– win’ situation. Corporate Social Responsibility in the Global Business World. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. Doi:

Hoffman R C (2007). Corporate social responsibility in the 1920s: An institutional perspective. Journal of Management History, 13(1), 55-65. Doi:

Indre Slapikaite (2016). Practical application of CSR complex evaluation system. Intellectual Economics, 10, 101–107. Doi:

Govindan, K., Shankar, M., Kannan, D. (2018). Supplier selection based on corporate social responsibility practices. International Journal of Production Economics, 200, 353-379. Doi:

Kèyù Zhü (2014). Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: Fallacy of the popular methods, European Journal of Operational Research, 236(1), 209-217. Doi:

Luning, S. (2012. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) for exploration: Consultants, companies and communities in processes of engagements. Resources Policy, 37(2), 205-211. Doi:

McWilliams A, Siegel DS, Wright PM (2006). Corporate social responsibility:
Strategic implications. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 1–18.

Mosgaller T (2012). Putting social responsibility into practice. The Journal for Quality & Participation, Cincinnati, 34(2), 39-41.

Öberseder, M., Schlegelmilch, BB., Murphy, PE. (2013). CSR practices and consumer
perceptions. Journal of Business Research, 66 (10), 1839–1851. Doi:

Pérez, A. & del Bosque, R. (2013). Measuring CSR image: Three studies to develop and to validate a reliable measurement tool. International Journal of Business Ethics, 118 (2), 265-286. Doi:

Saaty, T. (2001). Decision making for leaders: The Analytic Hierarchy Process for decisions in a complex world, New Edition. Pittsburgh, PA: RWS Publications.

Saaty, T., Peniwati, K. (2008). Group decision-making: Drawing out and reconciling differences. Pittsburgh PA: RWS Publications.

Saaty, T. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1), 83-98. Doi:

Saaty, T. (2011). On the measurement of intangibles. A principal eigenvector approach to relative measurement derived from paired comparisons. Notices of the AMS, 60(2), 192-208. Doi:

Tafti, Hosseini, Emami (2012). Assessment the corporate social responsibility according to Islamic values (Case Study: Sarmayeh Bank) Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 58, 1139-1148. Doi:

Tead, O., Metcalf, H. (1933). Personnel administration: Its principles and practice, 2nd ed., New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Trapp, N. (2014) .Stakeholder involvement in CSR strategy making? Clues from sixteen
Danish companies. Public Relations Review, 40 (1), 42–49. Doi:

Tsourvakas G, Yfantidou, I. (2018). Corporate social responsibility influences employee engagement. Social Responsibility Journal, 14(1), 123-137. Doi:

Wang, Y. (2011). Corporate social responsibility and stock performance—evidence from Taiwan. Modern Economy, 2, 788-799. Doi: 10.4236/me.2011.25087

ISO 26000,

Net Balance Foundation,


S&P ESG India index