**5. Methods and results**

Based on the fact that the university has different stakeholders, a deeper study about their environment deserves more attention. This can be understood as areas of university impact, organizational, educative, social and cognitive scope [10, 11], explained as follows:



• Coordination of cooperation programs for develop‐ ment, immigration, culture and the promotion of human rights and social and solidarity action

attention to diversity, especially in the areas of dis‐

• The management of the Office for Sustainability

ability, culture and social disadvantage

As a result, the previous authors conclude that some groups are more important than others

**1.** Other classifications are based on whether these groups belong to the internal or external

**2.** Classifies stakeholders considering their participation into an organization [60] as internal actors (participation in internal management), as stake‐watchers (generate influence/pres‐ sure in the development of activities), and as stake‐keepers (impose external control).

As it was mentioned before, the USR value is due to the benefits it brings to the stakehold‐ ers' community. In this perception, students and their legitimacy in university tasks deserve special attention, above all because they represent a significant consumer when obtaining the necessary training to perform professionally, benefiting from a better and responsible sys‐ tem of HEIs. Other stakeholders are benefited too, like academics and administrative staff by improving their training and management work. In the case of society, the achievement of graduates ready for facing the ethical challenges and values needed in the market is important,

Once we have analyzed these groups, it is important to examine how HEIs can manage these relationships with their stakeholders, carrying out pro‐action strategies which include social responsibility [56, 61]. The third university mission in the knowledge‐based economy [2] involves reconsidering relationships with different stakeholders and then establishing working relation‐ ships with each group [59]. Based on the previous background, the strategic management and planning of USR must propose an efficient management as a result of a strategic fit between corporate strategy and social responsibility, able to meet the social and wide demands of society. Thus, when a university seeks to be competitive, it needs to rethink whether its activities meet the needs of its stakeholders and perhaps need to build stronger strategic relationships with

Based on the fact that the university has different stakeholders, a deeper study about their environment deserves more attention. This can be understood as areas of university impact,

**1.** Organizational scope, related to the responsibilities that HEIs have toward teaching, re‐ search, administrative and services staff; in this sense, the university has an important

**2.** Educational scope, related to the responsible education of students and building the pro‐

organizational, educative, social and cognitive scope [10, 11], explained as follows:

due to their influence of critical resources:

206 Corporate Governance and Strategic Decision Making

among others.

**5. Methods and results**

file of graduates.

responsibility role of administration.

membership of the organization [58, 59], and finally

its stakeholders to respond to changes in the education sector [62].


**Table 1.** Comparison of USR practices between UCA and UPC.


Thus, when universities evaluate their impacts, it can be considered that university imple‐ ments a cycle of continuous improvements toward the effective fulfilment of its social mis‐ sion through four processes: (1) ethical and environmental management of the institution; (2) formation of responsible and supportive citizens; (3) production and dissemination of socially relevant knowledge and (4) social participation in promoting a more humane and sustainable development model [10]. Therefore, we must also emphasize that the importance of the USR comes from the commitment to society where HEIs must generate a dynamic of change toward a more fair society [63].

This chapter in order to provide evidences of the USR practices and their integration in uni‐ versity strategic programs made a content analysis of the web pages of the authors of the con‐ tribution. A content analysis of the University of Cadiz—UCA—and Polytechnic University of Catalonia—UPC—allows the identification of several USR practices (**Table 1**).

Source: USR practices extracted from the web pages of the universities, UCA: http://www. uca.es/vrsocial/funciones and UPC: https://www.upc.edu/rsu/es/eliminar/las‐acciones‐ que‐hacemos‐en‐la‐upc

In both universities, we identified several cultural, environmental and educational activities related to the integration of social responsibility in university activities. Most of these activities are focusing in two of the most important stakeholder groups for the universities: the employ‐ ee's staff and the students. In the specific case of the UPC, the web page classified these activities in four specific groups, aimed at satisfying and introducing socially responsible orientation in: research, teaching, organization and reflection. This classification allows us to identify what are the key strategic areas in the implementation of socially responsible practices in universities.

Most of these USR practices also meet the conditions of Burke and Logsdon [12], because they take part from the central aim of the universities, can give a differential position to them, pro‐ vide the capacity to anticipate future stakeholder expectations and are voluntary and visible in the university web pages.

Despite the fact that the content analysis is limited to two universities, it represents the first step in the identification of USR activities as well as their integration into strategic programs and plans of universities. Hence, we proposed the use of USR management tool for those universities, which are interested in integrating responsible initiatives.
