Social Responsibility in Stakeholder Theory

Social responsibility makes a company more competitive and reduces the risk of sudden damage to the company’s reputation and sales.

Starbucks had been rank as one of the World’s most principled companies around the world (Ethisphere, 2013). As the people are holding the corporation to the highest ethical and social responsibility, these are becoming the expectation of their consumers. Having all these responsibilities in mind, Starbucks is striving to enact its own Corporate Social Responsibility, guidelines for bettering stakeholders in its communities (Starbucks, 2013). Today the company not only focusing on the communities they are operating, but trying to make a huge impact globally. By doing so they are working with Non-governmental organization. Starbucks had been focusing on social responsibility since in 2009; one of the areas the company had been focusing is the Fair-Trade coffee selling. (Reis, 2009).

Traditionally the business objectives of business were to maximise profits, sustainability, and shareholders’ value but after the advancement of stakeholder theory there has been a radical shift in the business objectives towards meeting stakeholders’ expectations in addition to maximisation of profit. Typical stakeholders of a company except shareholders are customers, employees, and suppliers. Today modern business objectives are to meet expectations of stakeholders as much as possible. Corporate social responsibility has emerged as a phenomenon that is born out of stakeholder theory.

In recent years, companies are becoming socially responsible and now stakeholders almost expect a company to have CSR policies. Therefore, in twentieth century, corporate social responsibility (CSR) became an important development in public life (Barnett, ND).Corporate social responsibility is defined as “the ways in which an organisation exceeds the minimum obligations to stakeholders specified through regulation and corporate governance” (Johnson, Schools and Whittington, N.D cited in March, 2012). Stakeholders can be defined as “those individuals or groups who depend on the organisation to fulfil their own goals and on whom, in turn, the organisation depends” (Johnson, Schools and Whittington, N.D cited in March, 2012). There are many

When an organization partakes in “proactive behavior…for the benefit of society,” it is deemed as socially responsible (P. 155). However, prior to labeling a organization as socially responsible, it is important that we first identify what specific elements of proactive behavior constitute a socially responsible business. To begin, for an organization to be considered socially responsible on the highest level, it must take a proactive approach to doing business. This is defined as “[taking a] approach to social responsibility in which an organization goes beyond industry norms to solve and prevent problems” (P.155). In addition, it is standard for a socially responsible organization to incorporate a larger scope of stakeholders, to include external stakeholders, in their business decisions to create positive externalities, and mitigate negative ones, to benefit society as a whole.

Starbucks is one of the leaders in coffee industry. Starbucks has entered into many new markets and today it has more than 16,000 outlets across the globe (Johnson, Scholes and Whittington 2011). Due to unlimited business opportunities, Starbucks Corp has set strategies to enter India as it is next major hub for development in near future. Previously Starbucks has gained wide success in China and Japan due to high consumption of coffee and tea. Since its inception, Starbucks has tapped the major markets across the world, India was left untapped. In India, Starbucks has setup alliances with TATA Global Beverages which is a unit of TATA Group of Companies. Starbucks along with TATA has started with an investment of $80 million and plans to open 50 coffee shops in a year. Currently few coffee shops has been setup by Starbucks, however in near future, it is expected that the company will achieve its target in capturing Indian market (Lamb2009). Thus, besides sourcing coffee beans from TATA, Starbucks can now explore more Asian markets (Hitt, Ireland and Hoskisson 2012).

Starbucks celebrates 40 years with 17,000 stores in more than 50 countries (Goals & Progress, 2010). Starbucks thrive on their values as a company to improve the lives of people who grow their coffee, neighborhoods where the company does business, and they care for the environment (Goals & Progress, 2010). Starbucks strives to incorporate good business practices and ethics across the globe not only for the enhancement of the company but also for the enhancement of the stakeholders and the communities the company impacts. Starbuck’s mission statement is “to inspire and nurture the human spirit. As said by Howard Schultz, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer, in the 2010

Despite Starbuck’s natural efforts on trying to carry out sustainable business, must work towards improving/ reducing its carbon footprint on the planet. Starbucks, a multi-billion dollar company, containing over 16,850 stores in 40 countries (Lapore), follows the sustainable practices of B-corporations. Starbucks practices and strives to achieve environmental sustainability. Although, Starbuck’s tremendous struggle to increase environmental sustainability, they continue to break the rules that they have put in place through their malpractice of washing dishes and the non eco-friendly cups. Even though their gargantuan efforts towards increasing their practices, it is clear that it needs to improve its sustainability through reducing the energy

Corporate social responsibility can simply be identified as a duty, which is not a legal obligation lately, under very much consideration by every multinationals, as well as the growing firm. The ongoing concern is meant to increase the awareness between the business Individuals, to implement and draw line which should clearly indicates that what social obligation an organization has towards the society.(Caroll,1970) (Caroll, Archie, B.(1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility is towards the moral management of organization stakeholder.

Corporate Social Responsibility, a theory that has evolved since the 1990s, seeks to see businesses be responsible for their actions socially and environmentally. There is an increasing trend by businesses to adopt Corporate Social Responsibility Practices. This paper attempts to define the reasons why this is so, and what strategic issues are faced by companies who adopt these practices. The issue of Corporate Social Responsibility will then be highlighted in a case study of De Beers, the world's leading diamond producer.

The article “Strategy and Society: The Link Between Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility” by Michael E. Porter and Mark E. Kramer advocates that there is a link between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and competitive advantage, and there is an opportunity for innovation that benefits both the company and society that can result in a win-win positive sum game. Ultimately if your firm does not integrate a CSR program into your business core your competitors will.

CSR lacks universal methods. The United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) mentions that it is important to draw a distinction between CSR as part of strategic business management concept and charity, sponsorships or philanthropy. The latter applications make valuable social impacts that enhance the reputations of the companies, however, CSR is a continual effort instead of an instance. A few features that CSR should focus on are: eco-efficiency, employee and community relations, environmental management, gender balance, responsible souring, anti-corruption, stakeholder engagement and human rights. Utilizing some of these key features a company can bring competitive advantages into the market place. Increased sales and profits from operational cost savings as well as improved reputation and brand image and customer loyalty can result from a well-defined CSR strategy.

Stakeholder analysis is an integral part of what determines a business’ success. Within every business, there are various stakeholder groups that have individual specific needs. Each stakeholder group has to be consistently considered by the company when it makes decisions. Over the course of five weeks, students made decisions to help guide K-Tai, Inc. with its stakeholder analysis and corporate social responsibility (CSR) efforts. Several conflicting decisions were considered and a thorough analysis helped the CREO office come up with the best possible solutions to the company’s problems. The CSR simulation was an excellent tool to help students understand the importance of ethics in business and how to address the common issues that businesses face in today’s society.

Despite the conflicting nature between the social-capital theory (SCT) and stakeholder theory (ST), the role of ‘Corporate social responsibility’ (CSR) is a factor for a majority of organisations to gain an economic advantage amongst its competitors. Through globalisation, aspects involving profit maximisation and business reputation have become the primary influences of the ST. Alternatively, the minority of organisations engaging in CSR with the altruistic concern for the stability of the wider community and society, reflects the moral influences of values and stakeholder obligations. In summation, the internal objective of financial performance is dependent on the process that arises from CSR application to the inevitable outcome of profit maximisation within an organisation, thus re-enforcing the debate that is against altruistic form.

The integrative model of social responsibility, which involves the stakeholder theory and moral minimum theory, and the philosophical ethical theory of utilitarianism are the most responsible approaches to business because they involve the standards of knowing who your actions affect, knowing how to help the most people possible, and knowing how to benefit those who are left out of the positive externalities of a business decision. This paper will discuss the implications of these theories in further depth and will look at a few business cases that demonstrate a failure to meet standards of responsibility.