In 1960, Frederick wrote that Social responsibility in the final analysis implies a public posture toward society’s economic and human resources and a willingness to see that those resources are used for broad social ends and not simply for the narrowly circumscribed interests of private persons and firms (Frederick, 1987). Walton emphasized that the essential ingredient of the corporation’s social responsibilities include a degree of voluntarism, as opposed to coercion, an argument that business continues to put forth today. Walton also counseled the acceptance that costs are involved for which it may not be possible to gauge any direct measurable economic returns (Walton, 1967). The modern debate on CSR starts in the USA in 1970, when …show more content…
The 1980s have been described as having a more responsible approach to corporate strategy (Lucas, et al., 2001). Prominent work was R. Edward Freeman’s, on the emerging Stakeholder Theory (Lucas et al., 2001; Post 2003; Windsor 2001). Freeman said that meeting shareholders needs is the only one element in a value-adding process and he also identified a range of stakeholders (including shareholders) who were relevant to the firm’s operations (Lucas et al., 2001). Freeman’s 1984 paper continues to be identified as a ‘seminal paper on stakeholder theory’, which expressed stakeholder theory as the ‘dominant paradigm’ in CSR (Mc Williams and Siegel, 2001). The decade of 1980s, according to Carroll, is identified as a period in which the issue that whether socially responsible firms could also be profitable firms was widely debated by scholars. If it could be demonstrated that they were, this would be an added argument in support of the CSR movement (Carroll, 1999). Aupperle, Carroll, and Hatfield‘s 1985 study of the relationship between CSR and profitability ordered the priorities of four components of CSR previously identified by Carroll, as economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary (Carroll, 1999). The definition of CSR has not been much expanded by the literature of 1990s, however, it has used the CSR concept as the building block, base point, or point-of –departure for other related themes and
Corporations are encouraged to conduct their activities in an ethically responsible manner, however neither the corporate world nor academia has produced a single – all encompassing definition of corporate social responsibility (CSR). The basic problem is that there are too many self-serving definitions that often lean toward the specific interests of the entities involved (Van Marrewijk, 2003). There has even been a quantitative study conducted on the many definitions of the term (Dahlsrud, 2006).
The purpose of this essay is to research the notion of CSR and uncover its true framework and outline what social responsibility truly means to corporate organisations, and whether it should be seriously considered to be a legitimate addition to the corporate framework of an organisation.
On the other side, as the legal personality of the corporations evolved in the 1800s, enterprises were no longer responsible for serving the public interest. Consequently, any social welfare was symbolic and procured from the economic function of organizations (Banerjee, 2008). Furthermore, it seems that corporations are using CSR strategies as a window to present favorable images and obtain economic benefits. Historically the relationship between revenues and investment in CSR programs is a controversial issue. Furthermore, the power of the economic CSR rhetoric lies in the ability to validate particular ideologies to consolidate the power of larger corporations (Banerjee,
In this article, “The Truth About CSR,” authors Rangan, Chase and Karim stress the importance in aligning a company’s social and environmental activities with its business purpose and values (Rangan, Chase, & Karim, 2015, 41). Outcomes of CSR programs should be a “spillover” and not a primary focus of a business, expressing concern towards social responsibility and corporations failing to contribute to society accordingly (Rangan, Chase, Karim, 2015, 42). There is a great deal of importance in companies refocusing their CSR activities on a primary goal and in providing an organized process for bringing consistency and discipline to CSR strategies (42). Rangan, Chase and Karim want corporations to understand why it is important for them to evaluate their CSR activities and refocus them towards the goal of reinforcing the firm’s societal and environmental actions, while also ensuring their actions add to the overall purpose and values of the corporation. According to the authors, even though
Corporate Social Responsibility (C.S.R.) is a theory practiced in the business sphere since fifty years. It refers to the duty of business organizations to adopt certain activities that will benefit the society in some way. Charity, health-awareness campaigns are few examples that a business undertakes to fulfil its objectives of C.S.R. According to this ideal, it is important for various corporations today to undertake such social activities, apart from merely focusing on their objective of profit maximization. But, is it an obligation that is most important than other objectives of business? This thought further leads us to another significant question – In contemporary settings, should corporations be guided by the concept of C.S.R.?
CSR is the obligations of the business to pursue those policies, to make those decisions, or to follow those lines of action which are desirable in terms of the objectives and values of our society. According to (Carroll and Shabana, 2010), CSR has also become one of the most orthodox and widely accepted concepts in the business world during recent years. According to (Sweeney and Coughlan 2008) and (Maignan and Ralston 2002; Wanderley et al. 2008), Organizations increasingly use CSR activities to position their corporate brand in the eyes of consumers and other stakeholders, such as through their annual reporting . communicating about social activities does not always benefit the communicating organization, notably because CSR communication may trigger stakeholders' scepticism and cynicism (Mohr et al. 2001; Schlegelmilch and Pollach 2005).Many organizations engage in CSR because they believe that it is in the organization’s best
Stakeholder interests are postulated to be vital to any successful business, managers should directly and clearly take into consideration their stakeholder’s interests and needs, aiming to accomplish them through various company strategies (Theodoulidis, B. Et al. 2017). Sourcing responsibly is an integral focus for many companies applying corporate social responsibilities, the relations they have with down the line suppliers and farmers have profound impacts upon those workers, the company, its branding and society at large. Companies like Starbucks show that by acting sustainably and sourcing responsibly a company doesn't not have to sacrifice profit or market domination. CSR takes the stakeholder theory in the direction that is best for all involved, it aids supplier and farmers, supports the shareholders and allows the company to prosper.
Archie Carroll defines corporate social responsibility (CSR) as “the social responsibility of business encompassing the economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary expectations that society has of these organizations at a given point in time.” (Crane, 5) Interesting enough, there has been an abrupt growth of firm’s engagement in CSR within all industries. This is the result of growing requests from the civil society demanding firms, of all sizes, to legitimize their practices. (Crane, 4)
CSR ARE A COMPANY’S FRAMEWORK WITH EXPECTATIONS AND DEMANDS OF STAKEHOLDERS-NOT ONLY CUSTOMERS AND INVESTOR, BUT SUPPLIERS, EMPLOYEES AND SOCIETY ( BEAL, 2013)
The popularity of CSR has grown substantially in the last couple of decades. Many people may have grown skeptical of business in the wake of corporate scandals such as Enron, Tyco, and WorldCom followed by the sub-prime mortgage market, which have all gained large amounts of negative publicity. Stakeholders are more aware of the performance of companies along a broader set of metrics that portray the company’s operations in a more comprehensive manner that provides information about social performances and environmental performances. Much of the concept of corporate sustainability is rooted in the notion of sustainable development with can be defined as the ability to meet the needs of the current population without compromising the ability of future generations to
While this variability will inevitably exist, I propose that CSR can generally be defined as voluntary practices through which corporations, businesses and organizations utilize their own resources and power to benefit society, the community, the environment, social causes
The extent to which a business should practice corporate social responsibility is a continuing debate in modern society. Only providing services or selling products no longer constitutes a successful company, as there are expectations for firms to behave in a manner that is consistent with public policy. This creates a philosophical dilemma for corporations who wish to maintain positive relations with society, but not impede on their internal operations. The question becomes if corporations today can engage in business strategies that are both ethical and profitable.
Various authors have different definitions of what Corporate Social Responsibility. According to Lorde Holmes and Richard Watts, 1998 in their publication ‘Making Good Business Sense,’ they define CSR as “the continuing commitment by businesses to behave ethically and contribute to
Despite the increasingly obvious trend of CSR, conflicts around the topic are common especially in real businesses. Conducting CSR initiatives or programs requires investing corporate resources, including charitable giving, investing in green solutions, paying for better working environment and assisting community development, for returns that are usually distant and uncertain. For the decision makers within corporations, it is hard to judge because they would be at someone else’s expense to create social value. Another conflict occurs when it comes to the role of CSR in businesses’ development: whether it is harmful or helpful for the businesses’ profitability is still quite a concern, not to mention that the difficulties to get a measurable bottom line out of CSR initiatives.
In 1953, the book ‘The social Responsibility of the Businessman’ was published by Howard Bowen and there began the first concrete step towards CSR. The definition of CSR was clearly stated in this book. He exhorted organisations to fall in line with those strategies, to put into practice decisions which are highly valued by our communities or to follow those lines of action