Social Responsibility Concept - Coursework Example

Running Head: Social Responsibility Social Responsibility Customer’s name: Institution: Customer’s Course Tutor’s Name 22nd April, 2014 Introduction Social responsibility is a concept that has been there for almost 50 years and it has also gained prominence again the recent time. As Utting (2005) states, the ever increasing number of large domestic companies and transnational corporations have for a considerable period of time adopted number of social responsibility that entails concepts such as code of conduct and occupational health and safety. The revival of the concept is also clearly depicted in recent public debates and it has also generated a very general literature over time. Social responsibilities do not only present successful companies, but it also entails thinking on environmental and social aspects. Corporations need to include both the environmental and social aspects of their activities which lead to the making of profits. Social responsibility addresses the requirements of persons and customers cooperating with them in their business activities. Social responsibility absolutely affects a society and it also regulates the impact on the environment. This essay sets out to define social responsibility. It will also offer a list of the advantages and disadvantages of social responsibility and examples will also be offered to give greater strength to the content. Lastly, there will be a conclusion to sum up what have been discussed. Definition Social responsibility is viewed as a difficult concept to define. This is solely based on the fact that it tends to overlap with other concepts such as sustainable business, corporate citizenship, the triple bottom line and environmental responsibility. Based on the fact that social responsibility is a contested concept and definition that may be offered may be challenged by others for them to be able to apply any version of social responsibility (Blowfield, 2005). In social responsibility literature there are three visible schools of thought and they are characterized as neo-keysian, neoliberal and the radical political economy approaches. The neo-liberals tend to view social responsibility as the adoption of a number of codes as well as guidelines, policies that are initiated and driven by organizations. For example, when the Australian treasury made a submission to the joint parliamentary inquest, they termed social responsibility as an organization’s management of the environmental, social and economic impacts of its core activities. Neo-keysian school of thought is more inclined to the utilization of a wider definition. Its definition recognizes the role that is played by stakeholders in an organization and to some extent the state. Nevertheless, social responsibility is termed as an approach that is adopted voluntarily by organizations without the regulation by the state or any other stakeholder (Sarre, Doig & Fiedler, 2001). For example, the green paper by the European Union on the promotion of a European framework for social responsibility viewed social responsibility as a notion where companies integrate both the environmental and social concerns in their business operations and the interactions of other stakeholders is usually on a voluntary basis. The other definition is according to the radical political economy. This approach takes a more decisive position around the concept of social responsibility on a number of issues. A great number of authors in this area tend to possess normative views in the relation to the role played by the corporations and businesses in the society (Welford, 2004). Conversely, the radical political economy articulates different assumptions in relation to the existence and exploitation of organizational power in local, national and global economies. From the radical political analysts views social responsibility as being an effective method, but cautions that the self regulatory and the voluntary aspect of social responsibility policies are usually designed to deliberately avert the concentration away from control and external regulation of their corporate behavior as well as power and at the same time to mask and legitimate other business activities that seems to be environmentally and socially destructive (Christian Aid, 2003). Advantages of social responsibility A major advantage of social responsibility is based on the fact that it is an easier way of creating a brand differentiation, public profile and reputation. Corporations which are socially responsible usually create goodwill and also a positive image for their bands. Good reputation and trust seem to be valuable assets in today’s business world. As a matter of fact, without these assets companies would not even operate and these assets can be nurtured by being socially responsible (Vives, 2004). A good example in this scenario is the cola wars. Both Pepsi and coke are looking for ways of grabbing the greatest number of customers, but they adopt similar approaches in regard to social responsibility. They are both pursuing the zero net water usage strategy. Another advantage is based on the fact that it can be used as a way to save costs. One of the easiest and most convenient ways for organizations that aim to engage is sustainability is to try and cut costs (Welford, 2004). This can be done by the use of less energy or less packaging and though this saving may seem small, they will ultimately add up in the long run. A good example of these is the general mills, the company wanted to reduce their energy saving by 20% come 2015. Based on its social responsibility report, after the installation of the energy monitoring meters in some of their equipments, the company was able to save $600,000. Social responsibility also makes certain that organizations and companies have some level of customer engagement. There seems to be no point of undertaking social responsibility activities if others are not aware of it (Valor, 2005). For a number of years, Wal-Mart has been able to establish itself as a leader in various environmental issues. For example, in the year 2008, Wal-Mart undertook a campaign that was aimed at raising awareness of the environment and the impact that products have on it. Proper application of social responsibility plays a great role in engaging with customers. Disadvantages of social responsibility A major disadvantage of being socially responsible is based on the cost on the corporation. Efforts that are made by organizations for example, charitable donations, and sponsorship and product donations seem to cost money for the organization and it is unlikely that the money will be made within a short period of time. In spite of positive effects due to an improved corporate image, it is usually impossible for businesses to be able to value of corporate responsibility (Christian Aid, 2003). This means that there will be less money for the stakeholders and also less money to be reinvested back to the organization for future growth. Also, seven after the realization of a new business opportunity in an organization may not have enough money to venture in the opportunity. The other disadvantage is related to enhanced scrutiny. An organization that seems to be socially responsible falls under much scrutiny from their customer’s critics and competitors. For instance, some companies usually invest in certain energy saving measures and they also engage in awareness campaigns aimed at promoting recycling, their core competitors in the market may try to expose this behavior by showing that other parts of their business activities are not beneficial to the environment (Utting, 2005). Also a company that offers charity in good times and does away with its generosity to the community during the hard economic times may be viewed to be excessively apprehensive with itself and insensitive to the concerns of the public. The other disadvantage is related to fairness in their activities. When organizations choose to spend is socially responsible programs they can spend the money in any way that pleases them. This means that they can choose among a list of charity group (Sarre, Doig & Fiedler, 2001). In regard to this the dollars usually ends up in charities that are more visible to the public rather than where the dollars were needed most for them to make a difference in the society. For example, they may choose to sponsor the building of a road while the most immediate aspect that is affecting the society is the lack of a school of lack of clean water. Conclusion Based on the above discussion social responsibility is a concept that has gained a lot of acceptance in the recent past and a great number of organizations aims at being socially responsible. Social responsibility does not only present successful companies, but it also entails thinking on environmental and social aspects. Corporations need to include both the environmental and social aspects of their activities which lead to making profits for the business. Social responsibility addresses the requirements of persons and customers cooperating with them in their business activities. Social responsibility absolutely affects a society and it also regulates the impact on the environment. Based on the discussion socially responsibility has some perceived benefits such as cost saving, brand differentiation, creation public profile and reputation and greater level of customer engagement. Irrespective of the perceived benefits, social responsibility also has a number of disadvantages such as greater level of scrutiny, costly and unfairness in their activities. The advantages of being socially responsible greatly outweigh its disadvantages and thus it is advisable for organizations to engage in socially responsible activities. As a matter of fact, they need to do so for the benefit of the society, but not as a way to turn away the attention of the public from some of their ways of business that are not environmentally friendly. References Blowfield, M. (2005). Corporate Social Responsibility: reinventing the meaning of development. International Affairs, 81(3), 515-524. Christian Aid (2003). Behind the Mask: The Real Face of Corporate Social Responsibility. London: Christian Aid. Sarre, R., Doig, M. & Fiedler, B. (2001). Reducing the Risk of Corporate Irresponsibility: The Trend to Corporate Social Responsibility. Accounting Forum, 25(3): 300-317. Utting, Peter (2005). Corporate responsibility and the movement of business. Development in Practice, 15(3-4), 375-388. Valor, C. (2005). Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Citizenship: Towards Corporate Accountability. Business and Society Review, 110(2), 191-212. Vives, A. (2004). The Role of Multilateral Development Institutions in Fostering Corporate Social Responsibility. Development, 47(3), 45-52. Welford, R. (2004). Corporate Social Responsibility in Europe and Asia. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 1 (13), 31-47. Read More