Personal Motives For Corporate Social Responsibility

Because corporations are established to profit and shareholders invest money with expectations of a greater return, managers cannot be given a directive to be “socially responsible” without providing specific criteria of checks and balances to which needs to adhere. Therefore, it is imperative to the success of a corporation for managers to not act solely but rather to act within the policies of the shareholders.

or so many years our society has been thinking of forming new creative and innovative businesses, which would be more environmental and customer friendly. Nowadays a large number of different companies follow the social, ethical, as well as moral consequences when it comes to their decision making. One of the relatively new concepts involving economic and social concerns is Corporate Social Responsibility. Many of us apply this approach not only at work, but also in everyday life without even recognizing.

There are conflicting expectations of the nature of a company’s responsibilities to society. However, those companies that undertake what may be termed ‘Corporate Social Responsibility’ must decide; what are the actual social responsibilities of these companies? I will present a possible paradigm. Also, I will look at the benefit to the business that employs proper management as compared the business with poor management. This research paper describes my view of corporate social responsibility and compares the social responsibilities of Delta Air Lines and Spirit

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is a very controversial topic. A question that has been debated for the past few decades is; is it corporately viable to introduce social responsibility as a proposed addition to the work ethic of business organisations. As well as, if adopting the framework of corporate social responsibility would yield positive improvements for those organisations.

In this paper by Schaltegger and Burritt (2015) explored links between different ethical motivations and kinds of corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities to distinguish between different types of business cases about sustainability. Their qualitative study found evidence that some firms, despite energy cost as an insignificant part of their business costs as a driving factor to meet employees’ values. Schaltegger and Buritt (2015) analyzed the relationship between moral motivations, underlying ethical positions, and related sustainability management activities to distinguish four kinds of business cases: (a) reactionary, (b) reputational, (c) responsible, and (d) collaborative. After reviewing

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is something that affects all companies and should be an active factor in the company’s decision making. It is something all corporations need to care about. CSR is when business’ or corporations take part in an initiative or campaign for a cause that will benefit society and/or in some way make the world a better place (Taylor, 2015). Initially, Corporate Social Responsibility started to take shape around the 1950’s, but some say that it dates all the way back to the 1800s, the idea of CSR was seen (Carroll, 2007). One may think that because it is dated so long ago, it doesn’t have an important impact today nevertheless, it is proven that Corporate Social Responsibility is a pathway for entities to self benefit as they are in the process of benefitting society.

Corporate social responsibility incorporates environmental, social, and economic dimensions that provide leadership and differentiation opportunities for perceptive organizations. However,

The benefit to business of good Corporate Social Responsibility is difficult to quantify as it varies depending on the nature of the enterprise. Some scholars believe that there is a business justification for CSR. That is, what is good for the environment and society will be good for company profitability. And studies have shown a slightly positive correlation between CSR and financial gain (Steiner and Steiner, 2006). However, as Freidmanism claims, the first responsibility of business is to make enough profit to cover the costs for the future. If this social responsibility is not met, no other responsibilities can be (Hargreaves, 2006). Therefore it is critical that CSR activities are included in strategy formulation and that the level of resources devoted to CSR is determined like any other strategy – through cost/benefit analysis. Corporations will not throw money away…they need to see it

Corporate social responsibility has been one the key business buzz words of the 21st century. Consumers' discontent with the corporation has forced it to try and rectify its negative image by associating its name with good deeds. Social responsibility has become one of the corporation's most pressing issues, each company striving to outdo the next with its philanthropic image. People feel that the corporation has done great harm to both the environment and to society and that with all of its wealth and power, it should be leading the fight to save the Earth, to combat poverty and illness and etc. "Corporations are now expected to deliver the good, not just the goods; to pursue

Social responsibility is another integral component of a strategic plan. It is essential to integrate corporate social responsibility within the daily operations of an organization. By doing so, it helps ensure that the organization is moving toward the constant development and better interest of the general public by attempting to reduce any potential negative impacts of its overall operations. As such, corporate social responsibility is an integral method of gaining a competitive advantage through the enhancement of its corporate image through the perspective of the stakeholders and general public. Knowing this, more and more organizations are allocating additional resources in an attempt to strengthen their commitment to society. This is commonly demonstrated in the reduction of environmental pollution or assisting in providing financial resources for various social causes

Evaluating the measure of corporate social responsibility (CSR) is as much an attempt to ascertain ethical conduct of interactions with stakeholders, as it is a management tool of to limit liability. A research summary of Corporate Responsibility Best Practices, notes that 72% of NYSE Euronext traded firms surveyed have a formal corporate responsibility programs in place (Corporate Responsibility Officer Association, 2011, p. 6). Just 20% of the surveyed firms did not view corporate responsibility as a priority, while many firms believed that ethical corporate responsibility was ingrained throughout their culture and functions.

The issue of corporate social responsibility (CSR) has been bantered since the 1950s. Latest analyses by Secchi (2007) and Lee (2008) reported that the meaning of CSR has been changing in significance and practice. The traditional perspective of CSR was barely constrained to charity and afterward moved to the attention on business-society relations especially alluding to the commitment that a company or firm accommodated tackling social issues. In the early twentieth century, social execution was tied up with business execution. Thusly, business makes riches in the public eye and gives better expectations for everyday life.

Corporate social responsibility is not a new concept; it has evolved significantly, and presently it contains a number of terminologies, theories, and approaches. Nevertheless, one of the main issues that arise in this concept if the theories mix approaches, which use words that have different meaning and motives (Adolphson, 2004). This paper will thereby discuss and present theories of Corporate Social Responsibility in the context of ethical or normative and instrumental motivation. The paper will discuss CRS in both perspectives, which are ethical or normative perspective that mainly focuses in developing a better society, while instrumental perspective mainly centers its ideas on achieving economic objectives by creating social activities.

Generally, organizations are concerned with giving back to the society in order to appreciate the contributions of the host community to their growth, sustainability and survival according to Oko & Agbonifoh (2014). Using this as the basis of their operations, corporate alertness is increasingly being given to corporate social responsibility philosophies. Most business organization thus work on the idea of maximizing the positive effects of their operation on the society as the negative impacts of these operation are minimized - Farrell and Fraedrich (1997). This is the thrust of corporate social responsibility as considered an obligation among businesses in the advanced societies of the globe.

It has been a long time since I defined the most fundamental and strong motivation of corporations is maximizing business profit. Even after the proposal of corporation social responsibility, I assumed that only the result of unharmed business operation can make company start to consider social responsibilities and until they increased their profits they will remain no more than a bystanders from external issues be it social or environmental.