Essays on Corporate Social Responsibility and Competitive Advantage - Nike, Body Shop Company Research Paper

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper "Corporate Social Responsibility and Competitive Advantage - Nike, Body Shop Company " is a great example of a business research paper.   Globalization has substantially marginalized and weakened different political institutions, businesses are therefore asked to quickly fill the gaps. Contemporary business organizations are asked to lead the way to the more ethical world without the incentive or authority to violate society. The politicians need to be more confident in setting different standards for business ventures based on the internationalist approach. Corporate Social Responsibility is used to describe the way in which various business can take into account their financial and environmental actions and impacts that they are involved in.

It is a critical issue in business since the managers, consumers and the investors have started to learn how economic growth is linked to the social and well-being of the environment. This paper explores the concept of CSR and the relationship it has to the competitive abilities of the firms and the importance of ethical behavior in business organizations. Corporate Social Responsibility literature review Corporate social responsibility is a condition where a business organization goes beyond compliance and engages in different actions that can further social good, above the interest of the company and that which is expected by the law.

The term corporate social responsibility was first coined in the year 1970s. Different activities that fall under the umbrella of corporate social responsibility fall into three different categories, that is, ecological balance, economic growth and social progress (Mohtsham and Faria, 2012). The influence of corporate social responsibility involves its effects on the firm’ s social performance and FP performance. Literature indicates two different schools of thought in the case of corporate social responsibility.

The school of thoughts predominantly describes and debates the primary activity of the business organization as that of maximizing profits or society business interaction to attain the welfare of the community. However, the construct can be related to different aspects of the business like these expectations of the stakeholders, increasing the social performance and complying with the rules and regulations of the government. A study conducted by Mohtsham and Faria, (2012) further illustrated that incorporation of the corporate social responsibility in the strategic management of the business venture can lead to better outcomes for the firm (Mohtsham and Faria, 2012). The most dominant paradigm of the proponents of corporate social responsibility starts from Carroll’ s work.

Carroll described different activities that are included in the corporate social responsibility from the philanthropic activities of the larger social benefits. Carroll suggested that different firms are supposed to generate more profits, operate according to the social norms, obey the laws and do well beyond the expectations of the society where they belong (Carroll, 2003).

As to Mattenand Crane (2005), corporate social responsibility is meeting the different needs of the stakeholders in the community. Hence, corporate social responsibility discourse is quickly becoming more multidimensional, encompassing the social needs, profit maximization and stakeholders management. Some researchers such as Luetkenhorst (2004), recognizes corporate social responsibility from the engagement and compliance to the minimization of harm and to create more value. Jamali and Mirshak (2007), suggests that several business ventures in the developing countries are considering voluntary corporate social responsibility activities as philanthropy. However, from the management side, the benefits of corporate social responsibility in the human capital management issues and the safety of workers are highly increasing.

The theory of corporate social responsibility can be categorized into political, instrumental and value theories. These theories lead to sustained development from all dimensions. The principle of corporate social responsibility is leading various firms in accepting the triple bottom line for different decisions of social responsibilities such as social, economic and climate care (Garrriga and Mele, 2004).

References

Armando C, Costa R, Menichini T, Francesco R, and Gaetano S, 2013, Turning Corporate Social Responsibility in Competitive Advantages: a Two-dimensional Model, Knowledge, and Process Management.Volume 20, Issue 1, pages 50–58. Retrieved From: 10.1002/kpm.1401

Carroll, A, 2003, A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review.vol 13, no 4: p 503–530

Edvardsson B and Enquist B, 2011, service innovation and excellence model: Lessons from IKEA and other service frontiers. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence. Volume 22, Issue 5. Pp, 535-551. Retrieved from 10.1080/14783363.2011.568242

Françoise Q, 2011, Are competition and corporate social responsibility compatible, Society and Business Review, Vol. 6 Iss: 1, pp.77 – 98.Retrieved From:10.1108/17465681111105850

Garriga, E. and Melé, D, 2004, The Corporate social responsibility theories: Journal of Business Ethics, Vol 53, no1–2: pp 51–71

Husted B and Allen D, 2006, Corporate social responsibility in the multinational enterprise: strategic and institutional approaches. Journal of International Business Studies.Vol 37, p.838–849. Retrieved from 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400227

Jamali, D., and Marshak, R, 2007, the Corporate social responsibility: the Theory and practice in a developing country context. Journal of Business Ethics. Vol 72, no 3: p.243–262.

Joyner, B, and Payne D,2002, the Evolution and Implementation: A Study of Values, Business Ethics, and Corporate Social Responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics.Volume 41, Issue 4, pp 297-311.Retrieved From: 10.1023/A:1021237420663

Lance M, 2001, What do we mean by corporate social responsibility, International Journal of business in the society, Vol. 1 Iss: 2, pp.16 – 22. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000005486

Loe T, Ferrell, L and Mansfield, P, 2000, A Review of Empirical Studies Assessing Ethical Decision Making in Business, Journal of Business Ethics

Volume 25, Issue 3 , pp 185-204.retrieved from: 10.1023/A:1006083612239

Luetkenhorst, W, 2004, the Corporate social responsibility and the development agenda. Intereconomics vol 39, no, 3: pp157–168

Matten D, and Crane, A,2005, the Corporate Citizenship: Toward an Extended Theoretical Conceptualization. Academy of Management Review. VOL.30. no.1. p.166-179.retrieved from: http://amr.aom.org/content/30/1/166.short

McWilliams A, Siegel D, and Wright P, 2006, Corporate Social Responsibility: Strategic Implications. Journal of Management Studies.Volume 43, Issue 1, pages 1–18.retrieved from: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00580.x

Mohtsham M, Faria a, 2012, the Corporate social responsibility as the source of competitive advantage: Journal of Database Marketing and the Customer Strategy Management .volume 19, p.219–232. Retrieved from:10.1057/dbm.2012.19

Morgan P, and Covin G, 2000, Environmental Marketing: A Source of Reputational, Competitive, and Financial Advantage, Journal of Business Ethics.Volume 23, Issue 3 , pp 299-311.Retrieved from 10.1023/A:1006214509281

O’Fallon, M and Butterfield, K, 2005, A Review of The Empirical Ethical Decision-Making Literature: 1996–2003, Journal of Business Ethics. Volume 59, Issue 4, pp 375- 413.Retrieved from: 10.1007/s10551-005-2929-7

Treviño L, Weaver G and Scott J, 2006, Behavioral Ethics in Organizations: A Review, Journal of Management vol. 32 no. 6,951-990.Retrieved from http://jom.sagepub.com/content/32/6/951.short

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us