The paper “ The Key Drivers for Corporate Social Responsibility and Social Responsible Companies” is an intriguing example of the case study on management. There has been a strong debate concerning Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and how beneficial it is to the organization, the society, and other stakeholders (the government, employees, suppliers, and customers). Questions have emerged regarding the business of businesses, whether they should try to solve the ills of society or maximize the shareholder’ s wealth. In addition, there is a debate on whether or not corporate social responsibility provides greater benefits to the organization than it does to society and other stakeholders.
This paper tends to disagree with the motion that indeed organizations receive greater benefits from CSR than the society and other stakeholders do. This paper will cover the overview and definitions of corporate social responsibility, examples of socially responsible organizations, benefits of CSR to the society at large, benefits of CSR to the organization, mutual benefit of CSR, and the conclusion. Definitions of corporate social responsibilityThere are various names given to CSR which include community affairs, corporate responsibility, corporate philanthropy, corporate citizenship, corporate societal marketing, community relations, global citizenship, community affairs, corporate community involvement, and corporate giving.
There is no substantial difference in calling this social commitment that organizations have. There is no agreed definition of corporate social responsibility though it is important to arrive at an acceptable one. According to Sharma (2011) just like CSR ‘ responsibility’ has been ambiguous in the context of a business. On one hand, it has to do with accountability central to administrative control, involving direct supervision of behavior of other people in early form but in recent times it has to do with the empowerment of individuals to take responsibility and be held accountable for the consequences of their actions.
On the other hand, there is an emphasis on responsibility being a matter of ethics (Neimark, 1995) and a felt obligation for and to others rather than something that can be measured or specified.
ASQ Quality Press, 2010. ‘ASQ/ANSI/ISO 26000-2010: Guidance on social responsibility’.
Baker, M & Roberts, J 2011 ‘All in the Mind? Ethical Identity and the Allure of Corporate Responsibility’ Journal of Business Ethics, 101, pp 5-15.
Bannerjee, SB 2008 ‘Corporate Social Responsibility: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly’, Critical Sociology, 34(1), pp 51-79.
Bejou, D 2011 ‘Compassion as the New Philosophy of Business’, Journal of Relationship Marketing, 10, pp 1-6.
Cosans, C 2009 ‘Does Milton Friedman Support a Vigorous Business Ethics?’ Journal of Business Ethics, 87, pp 391-399.
Mulligan, T 1986 ‘A Critique of Milton Friedman’s Essay “The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits’’’, Journal of Business Ethics, 5, pp 265-269.
Neimark, MK 1995 ‘The selling of ethics: The ethics of business meets the business of ethics’, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, vol. 8, no. 3, pp 81-96.
Porter, ME & Kramer, MR ‘Strategy and Society: The link Between Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility’, Harvard Business Review, pp 1-15
Roberts, J 2003 ‘The Manufacture of Corporate Social Responsibility: Constructing Corporate Sensibility’, Organization, 10, pp 249-265.
Schwartz, MS & Saiia, D 2012 ‘Should Firms Go “Beyond Profits”? Milton Friedman versus Broad CSR’, Business and Society Review, 117, pp 1-31.
Sharma, G 2011 ‘Corporate Social Responsibility as Mutual Benefit: Why Should SMEs Care?’, PeopleWiz Consulting.
Smith, A1981 ‘An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations’, Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Classics.