“Businesses are owned by their shareholders - money spent on CSR by managers is theft of the rightful property of the owners-This is the voice of the laisser-faire 1980s, still being given powerful voice by advocates such as Elaine Sternberg. Sternberg argues that there is a human rights case against CSR, which is that a stakeholder approach to management deprives shareholders of their property rights.” (mallenbaker.net). This is one of the opinions which is against the concept of CSR which blames this theory for violating human rights of shareholders. Moreover, Lantos (2001), in the article ‘The boundaries of strategic corporate social responsibility’, while in agreement with the
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.
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.
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).
Controversy exists as to whether companies have a duty to recognize and fulfill their corporate social responsibility (CSR), or whether it is sufficient for them to discharge their business functions while complying with the law. The opponents of CSR argue that managers are custodians of shareholders' wealth and should only engage in business functions that they are qualified in, leaving social functions to be performed by the government. However, CSR has now become a strategic part of business activity because it enables companies to gain legitimacy and approval of the community to ensure their survival, while contributing towards profitability.
CSR programs ranges from community development to development in environment, education, healthcare etc. Provision of better medical and sanitation facilities, constructing schools and houses, and making the villagers more self-reliant by providing vocational training programs are the amenities that the organizations focus on. Many of the organizations are helping other peoples by providing them high-quality standard of living. Also, organizations are increasingly joining hands with non-governmental organizations and utilizing their expertise in developing programs which address wider social
Social obligation is a thought that has been of worry to humankind for a long time. In the course of the most recent two decades, be that as it may, it has happened to expanding worry to the business world. This has brought about developing communication between governments, organizations and society all in all. Previously, organizations basically fretted about the financial consequences of their choices. "Today, notwithstanding, organizations should likewise think about the legitimate, moral, good and social results of their choices" (Anderson 15). This paper will talk about the idea of corporate social obligation. It will examine the significance of partnerships setting up corporate social obligation ventures, and the effect these have on society.
For many years, researchers held that the core responsibility of a corporation was to provide shareholders with financial returns. Carroll (1979) proposed that organizations have other types of responsibilities towards the society. In Carroll’s view, at some stage society has economic, legal, ethical, and other expectations. The essential part of Carroll’s definition of CSR is that a company has four primary responsibilities: to be profitable, observe the law, be ethical, and conduct discretionary activities. Drawing on those four responsibilities Carroll (1991) created a four-level pyramid of CSR and stated that the CSR policy of a company must include all of them. Carroll placed the economic responsibilities at the base of the pyramid, since for a company to operate successfully, it must have a financial return. On the second level were the legal responsibilities which in order to be fulfilled corporations must pursue their economic objectives (Carroll, 1991). Placing the economic and legal responsibilities at the bottom of the pyramid was reasonable because those two are fundamental for a company to be successful. The ethical responsibilities were placed on the third level of the pyramid suggesting that organizations ought to conduct their businesses operations in a fair and appropriate way and ought to protect the stakeholders’ moral rights (Carroll, 1991).
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 described in regards to the Japanese's Internet market, Yahoo Japan Corporation (the Company) along with its consolidated subsidiaries and affiliates (the Yahoo Japan Group) to involve a full commitment on their part to the realization of an Internet environment that is characterized by safety, security and harmonious "with the expectations and needs of society." P38)
The origin of Corporate Social Responsibility in businesses has no fixed date. Most experts, scholars, researchers, practitioners, writers, philanthropists, civil societies & conscious citizens opined that it can be carried out in an ethical and socially responsible manner. It is assumed that in the year 1960 corporate social responsibility began to emerge, and the civil rights movement, consumerism, and environmentalism greatly changed the way society expected the business world to behave. In the year 1970 there came the common use of the term CSR along with many attempts to officially define the phrase. In 1980, the new International Development Strategy focused on achieving a more stable world economy, stimulating economic growth, evening out social inequities and countering the worst impacts of poverty. While scholars from the 1970s into the 1990s wrestled with CSR concepts and developed stakeholder theory, numerous business leaders had independently articulated similar views on the purpose of business. Throughout this period scholars attempted to define, redefine, and clarify the concept of corporate social responsibility that they saw being assumed by, imposed upon, and played out by business. In addition, scholars sought to connect and integrate disparate principles and activities into a more comprehensive conceptual model.
The importance and eminence of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) across the business world started to increase during 1998-2007. Role conflicts often arise when competing demands like business goals and social goals are in question. The increase in the sense of social responsibility,stakeholder pressures and concerns for the environment has heightened the focus of businesses on CSR. A business that fulfils its CSR sufficiently can expect an improvement in its financial performance,enhanced brand reputation, a reduction in its operating costs,long term sustainability, a boost in staff commitment,innovation and production,better risk management,good relations with its stakeholders and development of closer links with customers. However,in today 's world CSR is not being dealt with serious and proper attention hindering the success of businesses.Business ethics concern the study of proper trading policies and practices regarding potentially controversial issues.They are guided by law and are based on a certain scheme that businesses should follow in order to gain public approval and be successful.CSR embraces responsibility for the behaviour of companies and motivates them to have a positive contribution and impact
Rogers Telecom’s definition of corporate social responsibility is similar to the ISO 26000 in addressing the seven principle subjects, organizational governance, human rights, labour practices, the environment, fair operating practices, consumer issues, and community involvement and development. Although, not all issues belonging to these principles were addressed. The strongest attributes of the Rogers CSR definition supported by their 2013 CSR report are organizational governance, fair operating practices, consumer issues, community involvement and development, and the environment. The weaker attributes of the Rogers CSR definition supported by their 2013 CSR report are human rights and labour practices.
The concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR) has been developed for decades and it has been conceptualized in a number of ways. The business only can get success if there is interaction between all stakeholders in the company. The business organization of any form whether it is small or large, are seen as a creation of society and their survival is only dependent on the society. Socially responsible firms view CSR as a source of competitive advantage by attracting a higher quality and quantity of job applicants (Fombrun and Shanley 1990; turban and greening 1996). CSR can be defined as that strategy which manages the business processes to produce an overall positive impact on society. CSR is a concept in which the company decides how to interact with its stakeholders on a voluntary basis involving social as well as environmental concern. According to kotler and lee (2005) CSR is “ an obligation undertaken in order to improve the welfare of the society through on demand business application and contribution of corporate resources”
Social responsibility is an idea that has been of concern to mankind for many years. Over the last two decades, however, it has become of increasing concern to the business world. This has resulted in growing interaction between governments, businesses and society as a whole. In the past, businesses primarily concerned themselves with the economic results of their decisions. “Today, however, businesses must also reflect on the legal, ethical, moral and social consequences of their decisions” (Anderson 15). This paper will discuss the concept of corporate social responsibility. It will give the definition of the phrase, and identify some of the global factors that necessitate corporate social responsibility. It will discuss the importance of corporations setting up corporate social responsibility projects, and the impact these have on society. Social corporate responsibility and the maintenance of high ethical standards is not an option but an obligation for all business.