Milton Friedman’s (1970) work argued the relationship is negative, saying that expenditures beyond what is legally required or needed by the firm is a “misuse of company resources.”  Since then, scholars have examined whether corporate social performance (CSP) and corporate financial performance (CFP) are positively or negatively associated. Freeman’s (1984) work suggested the relationship is positive.  However, recent research by Barnett and Salomon examined the relationship between corporate social performance (CSP) and corporate financial performance (CFP). They hypothesized, and then confirmed, that the CSP-CFP relationship is U-shaped. Specifically, Barnett and Salomon reported that firms with low CSP have higher CFP than firms with moderate CSP, but firms with high CSP have the highest CFP.  They also found that firms with the highest CSP generally have the highest CFP.  In addition, they reported that the accrual of social responsibility deeds causes the benefits of CSP to increase at a higher rate than the costs, producing an eventual upturn in the CSP-CFP relationship

(Barnett, Micahel and Robert Salomon (2012), “Does it Pay to be Really Good?  Addressing the Shape of the Relationship Between Social and Financial Performance,” Strategic Management Journal, 33, 1304-1320).