Exploring the role of board-level corporate social responsibility committees in corporate social responsibility performance: A configurational approach

•Different configurations of board-attributes can lead to similar CSR-performance.•Three main board archetypes can be associated with high CSR-performance.•Absence of CSR-committee on small all male boards can lead to low CSR-performance.•Director experience can replace CSR-committee on large gender diverse boards. Board attributes interrelate with one another and the environment in which they are embedded in forming corporate social responsibility (CSR) performance, resulting in configurations of board attributes. By embracing a configurational approach, this study aims to investigate how the CSR-committee as a board structure interacts within different configurations of director characteristics (female-directors, director’s age, tenure, and experience) and other board structures (non-executive directors, CEO-duality, board-size) in shaping CSR-performance. The results of a fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) of 789 FTSE350 and S&P500 listed companies during a 4-year period (2013–2016) reveals nine board configurations leading to high CSR-performance, six containing the CSR-committee. Three board archetypes were identified. Their formation is shaped on main differences seen amongst them, leading to distinct archetypes: committee-boards, experience-boards, and hybrid-boards. The result of the configurational approach agrees with the argument “one-size” does not fit all, and different boards can achieve the same results via unique configurations.