Strengths And Weaknesses Of Corporate Social Responsibility

In (Cohen, 2008), the author quotes (Drucker, 1946) in noting that “Every organization must assume full responsibility for its impact on its employees, the environment, customers, and whomever and whatever it touches”. According to (Cohen, 2008; Drucker, 1946), that is the very definition of social responsibility. There are many ambiguities surrounding the concept of social responsibility; everything from definition to terminology, even what actions constitute responsible behavior is unsettled (Vogel, 2005). For purposes of this paper we will use the term corporate social responsibility (CSR).

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

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.

Corporate social responsibility is not going to solve the world’s problems. With that being said, corporate social responsibility is a way for companies to benefit themselves while also benefiting society. It allows companies to take small steps to make big differences in areas of need. Some may say that it is a bunch of “greenwashing” – the deceptive use of green marketing that promotes a misleading perception that a company’s policies, practices, products or services are environmentally friendly – but there is a call to action that inspires a company to get involved in the community (Kewalramani, Sobelsohn).

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 (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.?

Carroll (1991) organized different corporate social responsibilities as a four-layered pyramid model and called it the pyramid of responsibilities. The four different responsibilities - economical, legal, ethical and philanthropic are the layers of the pyramid. Corporate social responsibility involves the conduct of a business so that it is economically profitable, law abiding, ethical and socially supportive. To be socially responsible then means that profitability and obedience to the law are foremost conditions when discussing the firm’s ethics and the extent to which it supports the society in which it exists with contributions of money, time and talent”. And the different layers in the pyramid help managers

Drawing from these debates, Archie Carroll has developed “the Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility”, one of the most significant concepts of CSR. There are four kinds of social responsibilities that contribute total CSR, he suggested, Economic, Legal, Ethical, and Philanthropic (1991). Therefore being socially responsible does not mean forgetting the fundamental aspect of business, to make profit. The obligation of Law restricts business activities and they are the rules of the game which businesses have to obey. Being ethical is to perform actions that are fair, morally good, and of stakeholders’ interests, even outside the boundary of law. Considering corporate citizenship, philanthropic responsibilities are responses to the rising society’s expectations to business (Carroll, 1991). The notion of discretionary and voluntary distinguishes philanthropic responsibilities to ethical responsibilities. A good CSR firm should “strive to make a profit, obey the law, be ethical, and be a good corporate citizen” (Carroll, 1991, p.43) and without simultaneous fulfillment of the four responsibilities, the business should not be characterized as operating within CSR.

In today’s modern business world, commerce implements operation, drive and manner notions with endorsement and adoption of corporate social responsibility as a matter of course (David Henderson 2004). The stakeholder groups, for instance, governments, communities, suppliers, employees, customers and stockholders persistently claim administrators to dedicate capitals to corporate social responsibility (McWilliams and Siegel 2001, 117). Despite the fact, strategic corporate social responsibility is far more selective on being a standing corporation rate citizen and also addressing the social issues that the corporate creates (Micheal E. Porter and

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

A combination of recent changed to the world scene and pressures from public opinion now requires corporations to take on a new role, social responsibility. Corporate social responsibility is a corporation’s initiative to monitor and ensure compliance with the law, ethical standards, and norms. It can also be defined as corporation’s actions that further social good and go beyond the interests of the firm in order to make the world a better place. Essentially a corporation should embrace the idea of corporate citizenship, the idea that businesses are socially responsible for meeting legal, as well as ethical and economic responsibilities placed on them by shareholders. Although this is an alluring concept, it is also a flawed one. It

As a result, CSR has emerged as an inescapable priority for business leaders in every country. Many companies have already done much to improve the social and environmental consequences of their activities, yet these efforts have not been nearly as productive as they could be—for two reasons. First, they pit business against society, when clearly the two are interdependent. Second, they pressure companies to think of corporate social responsibility in generic ways instead of in the way most appropriate to each firm’s strategy. The fact is, the prevailing approaches to CSR are so fragmented and so disconnected from business and strategy as to obscure many of the greatest opportunities for companies to benefit

Crane, A. and Matten, D. (2010) ‘Corporate social responsibility’, (3rd edition) Business Ethics. Oxford: Oxford university press, pp.51-60

However, modern theory known as corporate social responsibility (CSR), has complicated the situation in that stating that companies are not only responsible to its shareholders, but also to the stakeholders which its actions may impact (Freeman 1984). While this may seem to contradict the mantra of profit maximisation, Russo and Perrini (2010) suggest that in today’s conscience-minded society, success is based not only on maximising profit but also on a corporation’s stakeholder relationships, which include social and environmental issues.

Problems of Corporate Social Responsibility in Sugarcane Value Chain in Utter Pradesh: An Analysis through Integrated Model of CSR