The paper "Processes of Undertaking CSR Activities within Business and Companies" is a good example of business coursework. CSR activities and practice has gained an immense following from different sections of society. As a result, several opinions and criticisms have been developed on the role of CSR in managing and changing corporate activities. Some people argue that CSR is a mere disruption for organizations mandated by law to make profits while others proponents for CSR argue that the practice will enable change in society. As a result, these people are of the view that CSR should be enhanced to ensure that certain obligations are upheld to a certain bear minimum.
Therefore, many experts have advanced theories and opinions on the processes of undertaking CSR activities within business and companies. These views are analyzed in this paper as it tries to outline several recommendations to be implemented in relation to CSR activities within companies. Constricted CSR Perspectives Several people have argued that the implementation of CSR activities within a company should be based on the interest of the stakeholders. For instance, economist Milton Friedman argues that CSR activities should only be conducted within the laws of companies through profit maximization.
He further contends that protagonists for CSR implementation within companies are people out to topple the system of free of the commercial community used by organizations for trade. These views are backed by Aras & Crowther (2009, p. 65) who argue that organizational leaders have a fiduciary role for the protection of stakeholder interests within companies or organizations. Therefore, constricted views on CSR advocate for the implementation of policies that protect and promote the interests of individuals who are stakeholders within different organizations.
This is inconsistent with the views of Adam Smith’ s book Wealth of Nations illustrating views of the free economy (Nair 2012, p. 49). He believes that every person engages in economically free enterprises for the promotion of self-interests. As a result, companies’ pursuit for profits protects and promotes these individual interests thus CSR should conform to profit-seeking agenda for businesses (Gö ssling 2011). These views are not consistent with some stakeholders who might be of the view that businesses should act responsibly in undertaking their operations.
For instance, some business leaders are of the view that companies such as oil companies should manage their business in an environmentally friendly and responsible manner. This might contrast with the interest of stakeholders who are interested in profits since the implementation of necessary CSR activities might exceed or be inconsistent with set regulations or laws. Moreover, critics argue that stakeholders’ legitimate income or rights should not be utilized in pursuant to individual interests of CSR implementation (Lozano 2008). CSR implementation within the organization has also found criticism from different quarters such as researchers and other critics concerning CSR.
For instance, researchers have argued that CSR amounts to window dressing since it does not address various and key fundamental issues. This is due to lack of consistency in terms of laws, standards or regulations used in the implementation of CSR activities within organizations. CSR policies, activities and regulations differ based on region and companies across the globe. As a result, CSR has attracted more criticisms for failures in ensuring that standards are adopted for conformity and improvement of practices in the industry (May 2011).
For instance, in China companies did not undertake CSR activities until a CSR code was introduced into Corporate Law. As a result, by the year 2012 over 1,700 companies in the country have filed CSR reports. Lack of a global standard or common code to drive CSR has ensured that this practice is undertaken in an ad-hoc manner that limits its growth and widespread adoption (Murphy 2008, p. 116). The organization for a collective responsibility for a common CSR policy within different industries is a challenging task.
For instance, the mining industry adopted the Voluntary Principles (VP) framework that was to ensure common standards in regard to mining and CSR in this industry. However, the adoption of these common standards has been daunting and chaotic in its implementation. Due to the confusion and the diverse state of affairs within different organizations and entities, the implementation of CSR has been slow, daunting and irregular in terms of generally accepted standards (Malik 2014). Researchers who share a constricted view of CSR are also of the idea that companies should each decide and shape a CSR policy that suites the activities and needs of the respective company or organization.
Aras, G & Crowther, D 2009, Global Perspectives on Corporate Governance and CSR, Palgrave, London.
Asit, R 2009, ‘Successful Experiments of Corporate Social Responsibility’, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 72-87.
Baxi, C & Prasad, A 2005, Corporate Social Responsibility: Concepts and Cases: The Indian Experience. Excel Books India, New Delhi.
Dahlman, C 2012, The World under Pressure: How China and India Are Influencing the Global Economy and Environment. Stanford Economics and Finance, Boston.
Ellis, A 2008, The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Employee, Praeger Publishers, Washington.
Fetscherin, L, Alon, S, Lattemann, C & Kuang Y 2010, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility in Emerging Markets: The Importance of the Governance Environment’, Management International Review, vol. 50, no. 5, pp. 63-79.
Gössling, T 2011, Corporate Social Responsibility and Business Performance: Analysis on Fortune 500, John Wiley & Sons, Chicago.
Idowu, S & Filho, W 2008, Global Practices of Corporate Social Responsibility, SAGE, Boston.
Lozano, J, Albareda, L & Ysa, T 2008, Governments and corporate social responsibility: Public Outlook on Corporate Policies, Edward Elgar Publishing, New York.
Malik, N 2014, Corporate Social Responsibility and Development in Pakistan, Ladybird Publications, Islamabad.
Mallin, C 2009, Corporate Social Responsibility: A Case Study Approach, Kogan Page Publishers, London.
May, S, Cheney, G & Roper, J 2011, The Debate over Corporate Social Responsibility, Oxford University Press, London.
Murphy, V & Abeysekera, I 2008, ‘Corporate Social Reporting Practices of Top Indian Software Firms’, Australasian Accounting Business & Finance Journal, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 112-119.
Nair, N & Sodhi, J 2012, ‘CSR Practices by SMEs in India: Lessons from Five Case Studies’, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 45-54.
Ogula, D 2012, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility: Case Study of Community Expectations and the Administrative Systems, Niger Delta’, The Qualitative Report, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 89-96.
Sanjeev, G & Nidhi, S 2009, ‘CSR-A Business Opportunity.Indian Journal of Industrial Relations’, vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 78-86.
Santosh, T, Rath, K & Namita, C 2011, ‘Practice of Corporate Social Responsibility in INDIA and the Perceptions of Employees and the Public: A Case Study’, South Asian Journal of Management, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 92-101.
Schwartz, M 2011. Corporate Social Responsibility: An Ethical Approach, Edward Elgar Publishing, New York.
Seema, S 2013, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility in India-The Emerging Discourse & Concerns’, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 112-117.
Urip, S 2010, CSR Strategies: Corporate Social Responsibility for a Competitive Edge in Emerging Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Lowell.
Visser, W, Matten, D & Pohl, M 2010, The A to Z of Corporate Social Responsibility, Perseus Books, San Francisco.