write essay on corporate social responsibility

Corporate Social Responsibility - Essay Samples And Topic Ideas For Free

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) represents a business model where companies integrate social and environmental concerns in their business operations and interactions with stakeholders. Essays on CSR could explore its evolution from philanthropic initiatives to a core strategic component of business operations, reflecting broader societal expectations of corporate ethics and sustainability. Discussions might delve into various CSR models and frameworks, and how they are implemented across different industries and cultural contexts. The discourse could extend to the examination of notable CSR initiatives, their impact on communities, and the balance between profit-making and social responsibility. Moreover, essays might explore the challenges and opportunities of CSR, such as greenwashing, stakeholder engagement, and the integration of sustainable practices. The implications of CSR on corporate governance, ethical leadership, and the broader societal shift towards sustainability and ethical consumerism could also be captivating areas of exploration. We have collected a large number of free essay examples about Corporate Social Responsibility you can find at Papersowl. You can use our samples for inspiration to write your own essay, research paper, or just to explore a new topic for yourself.

Corporate Social Responsibility and Ethical Behavior in Corporations

This research paper will compare and contrast the differences between corporate social responsibility and ethical behavior in corporations by considering the ethics that impact business decisions. In order for a clear contrast of the two there first must be a clear understanding of ethics and business ethics. Ethics comes from the Greek word ethos, which means moral character. When we think of ethics in terms of behavior we understand it to be an aspect concerning good and bad, the right […]

Corporate Social Responsibility against Cancer

Abstract As an assistant manager at Kenta Law Firm, based in Monroe, I intend to collaborate with the Susan B. Komen Foundation a non-organization corporation that is interested in reducing issues of breast cancer among women. Kenta law firm has noted that a significant populace of Monroe’s youth especially women and young children specifically those who are homeless are suffering from breast cancer. In this CSR partnership, our law firm will collaborate with the Susan B. Komen Foundation in addressing […]

Walmart’s Use of Databases

Introduction Walmart takes their data collection very seriously. They realize how useful data can be to them in a number of fashions. But what kind of data does Walmart collect, and how do they use this data? Does Walmart's data collection expose their paying customers to risks? Walmart uses statistics of flow of customers, purchase records, personal contact information, and internal and external market research (among others) to comprise their data to help them make better business decisions. Walmart uses […]

We will write an essay sample crafted to your needs.

Different Perspectives on the Concept of Corporate Social Responsibility

When it comes to Corporate Social Responsibility, an organization should choose wisely what it stands for. Friedman and Carroll have different perspectives on the concept of CSR. Friedman argues that social responsibility in a company is all about the economic value and how much profit is being made. He believes that any money used for charitable activities that benefit the society is an inappropriate use of shareholders' money as it does not generate any revenue directly. He emphasizes following the […]

Milton Friedman and Social Responsibility

Friedman do not affirm that the executives can act in any way as are used in accordance with the law and follow the ethical custom. But he closed the charity activity since they do not contribute straight to the victory. An upright overview of organization activities in the views of Friedman's agreement is simply not that carry out happenings simply since they are ethical, but since they are economically feasible. One of the main reasons for Friedman to the exclusion […]

Case Study – Lancaster Caramel Company

Introduction Hershey’s is one of the largest chocolate manufacturers that aims to continue expanding worldwide. The beginning of Hershey’s company was when Milton S. Hershey found Lancaster Caramel Company in the 19th century in Pennsylvania. He made his wealth by producing caramel pieces as the first product before turning into chocolate production. The idea of making chocolate came after he started covering the caramel pieces with chocolate, many people were impressed and attracted to the taste of the chocolate coat. […]

Business Ethics and TechFite

TechFite is a U.K-based company that has done well, even though their operations within a new multicultural environment, the United States, have been challenging. With their community and employee-focused organizational structure, the company has successfully empowered their members by including leadership development and facilitating strong coworker relationships. TechFite also maintains high standards by properly compensating employees for their contributions to the company as a whole. In addition, their highly respected environmental ethos is a major plus for the future direction […]

Review on Businesses Without Values and Ethics

This review will study the impact of ethical leadership, of employees, performance in an organization. The progress of an organization's achievements is based on the employees. The employees are considered an important resource to achieve competitive advantages. An ethical leader who shares its authority with employees will improve their performance. So, if leaders set the precedence for upholding high ethical values then the employee will follow suit. On the other hand, if leaders do not have an ethical value and […]

Ethics and the Business Professional

Evaluate your own performance as a morally responsible group member. Which behaviors do you demonstrate? Which do you need to develop? What specific steps might you take to improve? The concept of moral responsibility implies that a person can be evaluated with praise or blame for actions based on a moral code. Moral responsibility suggests that the person is in control of her actions and no other element in the decision-making process interferes with the person's control of the situation. […]

Milton Friedmen and CSR

Social responsibility can be viewed as a vital aspect of people's lives across the globe. Lately, it has also become one of the major increasing concerns in the business world. As a result, interactions between businesses, society, and government have greatly developed. In addition, the standard view of a business's social responsibility holds that it should involve actions that maximize its profit according to Milton Friedman. Contrasting to this view is the socioeconomic outlook of social responsibility which believes that […]

My Research on Starbucks

According to Management principles learned in business, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is valued not just by a business but also by the consumer. Despite some businesses recording massive successes in practicing CSR, other entities or organizations are conflicted about its benefits. I decided to pick and explore Starbucks because of its enormous social standpoint. CSR plays a significant role in the success of Starbucks. The company uses CSR as a long-term strategy, leading to the sustainability of its magnificent brand […]

Implementation of the Environmental Disclosure Requirement in Australian Service Industry

The issue of environmental conservation has been a primary subject in many countries across the world. Concerns raised in respect to the subject often stem from the negative effects environmental pollution has demonstrated worldwide. Over the previous decades, a wealth of literature has surfaced from the social accounting sector, indicating a continuous growth in the extent of social disclosure appearing in corporate annual reports. Specifically, the level of environmental disclosures has consistently increased compared to past decades. In Australia, for […]

Managing Sustainability Development

Executive summary Sustainable development practices for any organization have to be informed by the goals of the company. For Vodafone Company in New Zealand, the goals of the company are to produce quality cell phones, conserve the environment and encourage young people to work hard and be responsible citizens. The project will be undertaken to evaluate how the company can improve efficiency in operations and at the same time maintain the profit margin as it stands. The company is thus […]

What is Sustainability in Business?

The first aspect business looks when thinking about sustainability is the operational aspect and saving cost as it is easy to measure.Most of the resource we are using are non-renewable resources,from our energy need to the consumption of oil.But all these resources are bound to get over in the future.There is a term called peak oil,after which production of oil reduces due to reduce reserves.There is already an alert for helium gas which is used in many areas like filling […]

Sustainability Community Engagement and Diversity Inclusion Review BA

Introduction: Southern Company is an energy holding company that produces and sells electricity through various southern power subsidiaries. It's headquarters is located in Atlanta, GA and the company has been a part of the Fortune 500 list for 24 years. It's current rank is 126, up 19 spots from its ranking in 2017. The CEO is Thomas A. Fanning and he is in charge of 31,344 employees. Southern Company operates 11 regulated utilities serving an estimated 9 million people in […]

Kenneth Lay: a Study in Corporate Misconduct and its Impact

Kenneth Lay, the former CEO of Enron Corporation, remains an emblematic figure in the annals of corporate fraud and mismanagement. His story serves as a crucial lesson in ethics, leadership, and the consequences of corporate malfeasance. In understanding Lay's role in the Enron scandal, we delve into a narrative that intertwines personal ambition with a catastrophic lapse in corporate governance, leading to one of the most infamous collapses in American business history. Kenneth Lay, born in 1942 in Missouri, rose […]

Value-transmission in Multinational Corporations

The case study is a good exercise for contemplating value-transmission in multinational corporations and shows the difficulty of staying committed to development in the countries of operation. IKEA Case Study IKEA’s global sourcing challenge with Indian rugs and child labor exhibits the challenges and complexities of conducting international business. This case is particularly interesting because it shines light on a company’s response to new issues in corporate social responsibility brought about by globalization. The events take place at a time […]

Social Problems of the Company

Introduction There are many stories published regarding Nike’s Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) efforts in the last 20 years. Starting with Phil Knight, Nike’s visionary, the company through its CSR journey has overhauled the company from a period of time it was known for “slave wages, forced overtime, and arbitrary abuse” to a world class leader in the utilization of both social and environmental strategies to foster innovation, growth and sustainability, currently Nike is viewed among global CSR leaders. From the […]

The Corporate Gentrification

I chose to watch Michael John Warren’s production of Rent: Filmed Live on Broadway filmed on September 7th, 2008. This was the first time I watched this rock musical; I found the acting, directing, and production quality to be at a very professional level. The play was originally directed for the stage by Michael Greif. He is an American stage director who has won three Obie awards and received four Tony Award nominations, including one for Rent. The play’s plot […]

Managerial Ethics & Social Responsibility

Ethics and ethical behavior are difficult to touch upon, especially in current times when institutions are riddled with corruption, and driven by desire for money and power. We live in an environment where acting ethically for the sake of dignity can cost a person their job, family, and in extreme cases, their life. You may have heard about the tweet that cost Elon Musk billions of dollars. Musk tweeted, “Am considering taking Tesla private at $420. Funding secured.” This message […]

A Personal Education and the Ethical Dilemma and the Hypothetical Scenario

Here's a hypothetical scenario: I am a manager at LHEM (Large Heavy Equipment Manufacturing), a company that outsources the manufacturing of a specialized piece of equipment to a firm located in another country. We'll refer to this company as FF (Foreign Firm). Outsourcing this piece of equipment has saved LHEM a considerable amount of money, increasing profits by 15%. However, a recent newspaper article revealed that FF pays their employees only a few dollars a day and imposes extensive working […]

Was J.P. Morgan a Captain of Industry or Robber Baron?

Introduction J.P. Morgan set up the first billion-dollar corporation, which was U.S.Steel. Morgan was able to save the United States in a time of need while also making millions himself. On the other side, he treated his workers very poorly, making them work long hours and thinking of them as inferior to himself. Body Captain of Industry: Contributions to Industrialization Some people view J.P. Morgan as a captain of industry, while others view him as a robber baron. J.P. Morgan […]

About the Walt Disney Company

From its 1923 beginnings in animation to the magical resorts today, The Walt Disney Company, or simply Disney, is an international icon where "imagination has no age" (Disney, 2018; Perez, 2013, para. 15). Disney and its subsidiaries comprise cruise lines, media networks, studio entertainment, streaming services, and world-renowned theme parks in 45 countries (Disney, 2018). The Walt Disney Company employs nearly 200,000 employees around the globe, as well as an executive team and board of directors at its headquarters in […]

Ethics, Sustainability and CSR

The article by Julia Wolf on stakeholder pressure explores the relationship between supply chain management and sustainable corporate performance, taking a critical look at the Nestle campaign in relation to these factors. The article examines supply chain management and the influence of external forces. It also discusses the relationship between supply chain control and stakeholders' perceptions of an organization. It highlights how stakeholder pressure and supply chain management contribute towards achieving sustainable performance (Wolf, 2013). The paper covers several theories, […]

Chick-fil-A Controversy: Balancing Beliefs and Business

Chick-fil-A, a fast-food chain known for its chicken sandwiches, has found itself at the center of several controversies over the years. Founded in 1946 by S. Truett Cathy, Chick-fil-A has grown to become one of the largest fast-food chains in the United States. However, its expansion has not been without challenges, particularly concerning the company's stance on social issues, which has sparked significant public debate. One of the most notable controversies surrounding Chick-fil-A is its stance on LGBTQ+ rights. The […]

The Titans of Industry: who were the Four Robber Barons?

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, America witnessed the rise of industrial magnates whose wealth and influence shaped the nation's economy and society. These individuals, often referred to as "Robber Barons," amassed vast fortunes through aggressive business practices and strategic monopolies. The term "Robber Baron" itself reflects a duality: while these men were seen as captains of industry and visionaries, they were also criticized for their exploitative tactics and the immense power they wielded over the market. The […]

The Intriguing Layers of “The Informant!”: a Study of Corporate Espionage and Whistleblowing

"The Informant!" is a 2009 film directed by Steven Soderbergh, starring Matt Damon as the central character, Mark Whitacre. Based on true events, the movie delves into the world of corporate espionage, focusing on Whitacre’s role as a whistleblower in the lysine price-fixing conspiracy at Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), a major agribusiness conglomerate. What sets this film apart is its unique blend of dark comedy and drama, making it both an intriguing and entertaining watch. At the heart of "The […]

The Case of Coyote V. Acme: Analyzing a Cultural Icon

In the realm of animated entertainment, few characters are as enduringly popular as Wile E. Coyote and his perpetual pursuit of the Road Runner. Central to this enduring appeal is the frequent and spectacular failure of Coyote's elaborate schemes, often involving products from the fictional Acme Corporation. The humorous and exaggerated mishaps have led to the satirical "Coyote v. Acme" case, where Wile E. Coyote hypothetically sues Acme for the countless defective products that have caused him endless physical harm […]

Additional Example Essays

• Analysis of Letter from Birmingham Jail
• The Importance of Professional Bearing in the Military
• Research Paper #1 – The Trail of Tears
• “Allegory of the Cave”
• Rosa Parks Vs. Harriet Tubman
• Cons Police Discretion
• Martin Luther King as Activist and Outsider
• The History of the United States of America
• New Imperialism
• How is the Crucible an Allegory for Mccarthyism
• Is Andrew Carnegie a Hero? Pros and Cons

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

• Entertainment
• Environment
• Information Science and Technology
• Social Issues

Home Essay Samples Business

Essay Samples on Corporate Social Responsibility

Assessing csr's impact on profitability: article review.

Introduction “Social responsibility of business is to increase its profits as long as it stays within the rules of the game” (Friedman 1962). This quote represents the view of renowned economist Milton Friedman. It can be said that this view is only limited to one...

• Article Review
• Corporate Social Responsibility

Corporate Social Responsibility: Taking Responsibility For Actions In Businesses

Many consumers require companies to change the way they carry out their operations by becoming more transparent and taking responsibility for the issues in society. Consequently, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has taken root in today's corporate world. Organizations that fail to incorporate CSR programs within...

• Responsibility
• Social Responsibility

The Investigation into the Volkswagen's Emission Scandal

Introduction The report would investigate and research the Volkswagen (VW) diesel car scandal that was reported worldwide in the late summer, early autumn of 2015. Upon analysis of the case scenario, the researcher would identify the legal, social, ethical and professional issues associated with the...

The Story of Wikileaks Foundation and Its Controversies

What is Wikileaks? WikiLeaks is an online non-profit organization which was founded by Julian Assange in 2006. It is a website that collects data and basically steals secrets from the government. It is also given secrets by anonymous sources which they then publish online for...

The Role of Sustainable Development in the Resource Management

What is a resource management and what is the role of the sustainable development? In this text we are going to take into consideration how we started using the resources and how we end it up by using it in a wrong way. From the...

• Resource Management

Stressed out with your paper?

Consider using writing assistance:

• 100% unique papers
• 3 hrs deadline option

Problems in Balancing Corporate Aims and Workers Dreams in Human Resource Management

Employee policy does not stop with taking records of techniques and practices. This was stated in the works by Brown, et al. (2019) as they reviewed literatures in evaluating the HRM organisation of talents in T&H industry. They revealed that hiring and staffing can traverse...

• Human Resource Management

The Ethics and Profits of Social Responsibility in Corporations

When it comes to expanding a business internationally there are several factors that must be considered before making the big move. Expanding internationally takes time as there are ethical procedures as well as the fact that the way procedures are done in one country may...

Improving Economic Growth with Coporate Social Responsibility

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) refers to the awareness, acceptance and management of the wider implications of corporate decisions. (Michalaska, 2019). CSR is “the responsibility of a company for the totality of its impact” (Chandler, 2001) European commission states that it is expected from companies to...

• Economic Growth

Corporate Social Responsibility Among Millenials

In the past three years, I have participated in competitive sales speaking, and through listening to other participants, I have observed one thing they all have in common: every sales speech, although selling a product, has a section on how the company gives back. Over...

• Millennial Generation

Immense Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Businesses

Introduction Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) develop an economic of the business to contribute the achievable success in competitive advantage that build the reputation and acquire the trust of people. Providing in quickly improving that need for enhancing transparency, firm citizenship, maintain on social, ethical and...

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): An Essential Strategy for Successful Businesses

Introduction Historically, the ultimate goal of any corporation has been making money and increasing shareholder's value because they are the real owners of the company, and without them, the company won't exist. However, over the last decade, a concept known as Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)...

Environmental Protection And The Social Responsibility Of Firms

Introduction Responsible business concerns itself with allowing and ensuring the application of social and moral principles in business decision making. Through the definitions, the following principles of responsible business can be drawn: Use of raw materials that have been proven to have less damage to...

• Environmental Protection

Managing Corporate Citizenship and Sustainability in the Age of Globalization

The stakeholders affected by the decision of the human resource manager include the management, the employees, both the fired and those still working, and the clients of the organization. The management is affected because the company is understaffed and the available resources underutilized. This means...

• Business Ethics
• Corporate Culture

The Concept of Sustainable Development and Employee Perception

Introduction Background of Corporate Sustainability During earlier times, the main objective of organizations was efficient utilization of resources and to capitalize on the fact that how efficient an organization is to convert its capital into profits (Jensen and Meckling 1976). The main role of the...

• Sustainability

Components To Measure Good Governance

The idea of great administration has picked up noticeable worth around the globe lately. The term governance has turned out to be synonymous to sound improvement governance. Subhash et al, 2015 say that in the mid 1990’s as manageability with the accentuations on adherence to...

• Role of Government

Corporate Governance & What You Should Know About It

The finest companies across the globe differentiate themselves from the undistinguished ones by adopting high standards of corporate governance. Even so, authoritarian regulations have placed an increasing demand on companies to be more responsive to investors, to engage shareholders and protect minority interest. Also, corporations...

• Organizational Structure

The Importance Of Corporate Governance In Bangladesh

Abstract Corporate governance is a set of principles that should be incorporated into every part of the company to enusre proper accountability and responsibility. This study focues on the state of Corporate governance in Pharmaceutical industry to understand how it has been implied. Corporate governance...

Colgate-Palmolive'S Csr And Sustainability Report

Colgate-Pamolive is an American worldwide corporation focused on the production, processing, and distribution of household, health care, personal care products and services. The corporation was founded in 1806 and became Colgate-Pamolive in 1928 after partnering with another company. Since 2017, Colgate-Palmolive is currently ranked ninth...

The Impact Of Hurricane Katrina On Organizations: Valero Energy Case Study

Hurricane Katrina is the terrible natural disaster occurred suddenly in nature which resulted a serious damage and many deaths. It’s almost been 10 years, Hurricane Katrina hit most of the states. This hurricane caused so much loss and destroyed several houses and many people died...

• Hurricane Katrina
• Organization

Importance Of Corporate Social Responsibility & Governance

Corporate Governance Corporate governance refers to the standard of relationship between the board of directors, management, shareholders, auditors and other stakeholders that determines how a company is functions. In corporate governance it identifies who has the power to make the decisions. Corporate administration guarantees that...

Best topics on Corporate Social Responsibility

1. Assessing CSR’s Impact on Profitability: Article Review

2. Corporate Social Responsibility: Taking Responsibility For Actions In Businesses

3. The Investigation into the Volkswagen’s Emission Scandal

4. The Story of Wikileaks Foundation and Its Controversies

5. The Role of Sustainable Development in the Resource Management

6. Problems in Balancing Corporate Aims and Workers Dreams in Human Resource Management

7. The Ethics and Profits of Social Responsibility in Corporations

8. Improving Economic Growth with Coporate Social Responsibility

9. Corporate Social Responsibility Among Millenials

10. Immense Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Businesses

11. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): An Essential Strategy for Successful Businesses

12. Environmental Protection And The Social Responsibility Of Firms

13. Managing Corporate Citizenship and Sustainability in the Age of Globalization

14. The Concept of Sustainable Development and Employee Perception

15. Components To Measure Good Governance

• Business Analysis
• Dunkin Donuts
• SWOT Analysis
• Grocery Store

Need writing help?

You can always rely on us no matter what type of paper you need

*No hidden charges

100% Unique Essays

Absolutely Confidential

Money Back Guarantee

By clicking “Send Essay”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement. We will occasionally send you account related emails

You can also get a UNIQUE essay on this or any other topic

Thank you! We’ll contact you as soon as possible.

• Call to +1 844 889-9952

Corporate Social Responsibility

Business ownership – A view from Stakeholders Perspective

Only a few corporations take the csr seriously, economic hard time and core business focus, role and responsibility conflict, environmental management and corporations’ profitability.

Long periods of time have seen businesses sustain success in the visibly competitive world of trade. This success is linked to good governance from the board of management, with support from the shareholders. Similarly, businesses that have performed poorly in the past are connected to the weaknesses of the boards of governors, who in one way or another failed to address specific issues that confront their business venture. The management of corporations is in most cases under the leadership of a chief executive officer (CEO), who is given the opportunity to manage the corporation by the shareholders (Mallin, 2007). The CEO reports directly to the board of directors. While the board plays a critical role in ensuring that the management and the CEO of the organization get everything right, the board is normally answerable to the shareholders (Monks & Minow, 2007, p.126).

It is noted that the test of any effective governance and management is reflected in the degree to which an organization achieves its purpose and set goals (Jensen, 1976, p.4). However, another phenomenon has emerged in the world of business where the roles of business entities have been billed to go beyond shareholder satisfaction. This is Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) which has been linked with the responsibility of caring for stakeholders in a wider perspective of the global or regional community (Carroll, 1999). Others refer to it as corporate citizenship, with the common belief that it influences all the aspects of the business on a global or regional scale. This belief is pinned on the notion that businesses matter since they create a lot of wealth, which they are required to share with the community under the banner of “stakeholders” (Atkinson, Waterhouse & Wells, 1997, p.25). In other words, the concept of the CRS is a state in which an organization decides where it fits in social fabrics, by addressing the ethics of business, corporate governance, environmental issues, and any other issue within the social context of the society (Bushman & Smith, 2003). But is CSR necessary for the success of a corporation? Or is CSR an obligation of the Corporations? This paper critically analyzes whether the corporations have the role of Corporate Social Responsibility as part of their duty in the wider aspect of their roles.

According to some business pundits, business is principally owned by stakeholders, and that any money spent on Corporate Social Responsibility is a waste of corporation’s resources and ‘polite robbery’ from the rightful owners of the business (Bushman & Smith, 2003, p.14). The case against CSR can be traced back to a statement by scholar and business leader, Laisser-Fair. Supporting his position are people like Elaine Sternberg, who argues that practicing CRS is basically going against human rights; the right of owners to enjoy the right to reap from their efforts, hence they are denied the right to property ownership (Werther & Chandler, 2006). Stating that the objectives of every contemporary view are ridiculous, she argues that the right to own a property is earned fairly in a business environment and thus should be respected at all costs (Werther & Chandler, 2006, p.39). However, a view that “ordinary decency, honesty, and fairness” should be at the forefront of every corporation is also paramount in many ways (Jensen, 1996).

It is also argued that corporate social responsibility undermines the very base of a free society (Grossman & Hart, 1982). This is because of the acceptance of the corporate leaders that they have a social responsibility to satisfy the needs of those who have not contributed directly to the success of the corporation. It thus means that the responsibility to make more profit to the shareholders is jeopardized.

The past surveys of the most respected companies in the globe show that corporations that have not concentrated much on the topic do better than the ones which have concentrated much on CSR activities (Freeman, 1994). The survey revealed that the position of “The Most Respected Business Leaders” has been occupied by those executives or business leaders who do not play nice in the market, hence creating a belief that being good to the stakeholders at large is not

the way to go for success in business (Freeman, 1994). For instance, business leaders like Bill Gates are known to have not played the business game fairly, but still emerge with honors on their achievements (Monks & Minow, 2007). In fact, Microsoft is associated with some of the highest-profile cases of playing ‘big brother’ in the business environment hence jeopardizing the success of other firms in the same line of business (Monks & Minow, 2007, p.172). In fact, Bill Gates has used his huge financial achievements in the market to give away huge sums of money to the needy, at the expense of the competing firms.

Another notable case is that of Jack Welch of General Electric. He played nasty in the business world by a memorable and anti-social downsizing in his corporation and cases of environmental pollution that led to a lot of criticism from the society members, including the fellow business leaders (Monks & Minow, 2007, p.173). However, Alchian & Desmetz (2002) argues that Welch played his part in a manner that would be considered social responsibility activity, especially through his restructuring of the employee status through empowerment. Welch is in records as to have said that making a profit and paying taxes should not be the sole agenda that occupies the minds of the corporation leaders (Alchian & Desmetz, 2002).

In the dimension of core business and the need to focus on it, especially during this period of economic hardship, many scholars have argued that one should not lose focus of core business in the name of spending money unnecessarily. Colley (2003, p.213) states that “you cannot go round spending extravagantly” on unimportant issues while you are retrenching workers and the reputation of the company is headed downhill. From this argument, it is easy to argue that the reputation of the company may not be easily redeemed when the very society that is supposed to respond positively towards their activities are skeptical about everything they do in the name of CSR.

Fombrun (1996) on the other hand argues that the process of managing CSR depends on the aspect of managing a business. In this dimension, one can handle it poorly or well depending on whether the managers keep a firm focus on the business goals and objectives. It is, therefore, possible to reason out that time and again it is the corporation’s responsibility to keep off those activities that would attract the attention of pressure groups, especially the environmentalists or to avoid carrying out activities that may lead to prosecution and paying of regulatory charges (Fombrun, 1996). He states that through such an initiative, there would be no need for splashing out money for CSR activities. After all, many observe that CSR can lead to withdrawal of attention towards the improvement of quality, as the corporation will be spending a lot of time and money on building the image through CSR at the expense of improving product quality (Freeman 1994).

Historically, businesses have moved beyond morality and public policy, hence the need to do what is needed; create an environment for sustainable profit and growth (Millstein, 1998). By doing this, the government is benefiting through taxation, hence the need to create a favorable framework for the proper and fair game in society. Millstein (1998) argues that it is not logical to insist that smoking remain legal and adding a huge tax on it at the expense of consumers, and still act in the name of CSR. In fact many have argued that such activities or actions are purely not in the interest of the wider stakeholders, hence the call for the wholesome illegalization of tobacco.

It is indeed becoming extremely challenging as it is getting extremely hard to sustain the impact of such negative perceptions. In fact, taking an example of the tobacco industry still, they are actually global players, a big corporation that does continuously grow in its global networks at the expense of other locally based corporations. This makes it possible to take a global look at the scenario thus assuming the roles played by the locally based corporations. In essence, this may be the point behind many organizations hiding in the blanket of “small impact group” of corporations (Alchian & Desmetz, 2002).

Several studies have indicated that almost every business idea or a business venture that one may think of has the ability to “shift 1% of its overall turnover straight into its bottom line”, only if proper environmental management is undertaken in a way that would minimize wastes (Bushman & Smith, 2003). However, a lot of business leaders do not positively conceive the idea of spending money on environmental conservation or minimizing waste through specific environmental initiatives (Bushman & Smith, 2003). According to Bushman & Smith, business leaders do not like the idea of preventing the on-coming problem, but like acting after the disaster so that they can rebuild their name through CSR activities. In principle, the solution to the problems only comes after the need to solve an already existing problem rather than acting to clear the looming one.

There is considerable evidence that good governance cannot be replaced by activities of CSR. It must also be noted that the governance of corporations relies on the internal means through which their performances are accomplished (Colley, 2003). There is also little debate that good corporate governance will definitely impact the overall performance of the corporation. Again, while governance of a corporation is comprised of the internal relationships amongst shareholders, boards of directors, and managers, it must be acknowledged that such relationships are a result of respective roles of the government and private sector. This is seen in the way governments manage the laid down regulations, the general perception of the public as well as voluntary private initiatives. It is therefore important to note that CSR is basically an image-building initiative that in most cases can be avoided at the initial stages of company development. Again it should therefore be acknowledged that the primary role of corporate governance is to ensure the shareholders get their rightful control and benefit of the corporation rather than venturing into the image-building exercise through CSR.

Alchian, A., & Desmetz H. (1972) Production, Information Costs and Economic Organization. American Economic Review , 62, pp. 777-795.

Atkinson, A., & Waterhouse J., & Wells R. (1997) A stakeholder approach to strategic performance measurement. Sloan Management Review , Spring [38(3)]: 25-36.

Bushman, R., & Smith J. (2003) Trasparency, Financial Accounting Information and the Corporate Governance. FRBNY, Economic Policy Review , April.

Carroll, A. B. (1999) Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business and Society 38(3), 268-295.

Colley, J.L. (2003) Corporate Governance . London. McGraw-Hill Professional.

Fombrun, C., J. (1996). Reputation: Realizing Value from the Corporate Image . Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Freeman E. R. (1984) Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach . Chicago. Pittman Books Limited.

Grossman, S., & Hart O. (1982) Corporate Financial Structure and Managerial Incentives. The Economics of Information and Uncertainty . Chicago. University of Chicago press.

Jensen, M. C. (1976) Theory of Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure. Working Paper , No 3 (1).

Mallin, C.A. 2007 Corporate Governance , 2 nd Edition. Oxford. Oxford University Press.

Millstein, I.M. (1998) Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development : Business Sector Advisory Group on Corporate Governance . London. OECD Publishing.

Monks, R. G. & Minow, N. (2007) Corporate Governance , 4 th Edition. New York. Wiley Blackwell.

Werther, B.W., & Chandler, D. (2006) Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Stakeholders in a Global Environment . Miami. University of Miami Publishing Press.

Cite this paper

Select style

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

BusinessEssay. (2022, November 24). Corporate Social Responsibility. https://business-essay.com/corporate-social-responsibility/

"Corporate Social Responsibility." BusinessEssay , 24 Nov. 2022, business-essay.com/corporate-social-responsibility/.

BusinessEssay . (2022) 'Corporate Social Responsibility'. 24 November.

BusinessEssay . 2022. "Corporate Social Responsibility." November 24, 2022. https://business-essay.com/corporate-social-responsibility/.

1. BusinessEssay . "Corporate Social Responsibility." November 24, 2022. https://business-essay.com/corporate-social-responsibility/.

Bibliography

BusinessEssay . "Corporate Social Responsibility." November 24, 2022. https://business-essay.com/corporate-social-responsibility/.

• H2O Company : Human Resource Functions Analysis
• Managing the Virtual Organization
• E-Business Support and Strategy
• Human Resource Management Challenges in “Genpact”
• Confidence, Image and Crisis Management
• Wal-Mart: Organizational Behavior Concepts
• Organizational Culture and Performance Measurement Systems
• Six Sigma in Context of Analysis of Friends Seminary School Financial and Administration Services Transformation
• Finding the Best Sources for Financing Your Business. Franchise Help
• CNN and BBC: Total Quality Management

Home — Essay Samples — Sociology — Social Responsibility — Corporate Social Responsibility in Business

Corporate Social Responsibility in Business

• Categories: Social Responsibility

About this sample

Words: 724 |

Published: Jan 31, 2024

Words: 724 | Pages: 2 | 4 min read

Table of contents

1. the concept of csr, 2. benefits of csr in business, 3. implementing csr initiatives, 4. examples of successful csr practices in business, 5. challenges and criticisms of csr in business, 6. future trends and the role of csr in business sustainability, 7. conclusion, references:.

• Cone Communications and Ebiquity survey - "2015 Cone Communications/Ebiquity Global CSR Study"
• Nielsen survey - "The sustainability imperative: New insights on consumer expectations"
• PwC study - "The purpose effect: Building business by inspiring employees"
• Deloitte survey - "The Deloitte Millennial Survey 2017"

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

• Expert in: Sociology

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 415 words

3 pages / 1475 words

2 pages / 964 words

6 pages / 2676 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Social Responsibility

In summary, personal responsibility is essential for personal growth, effective decision-making, and achieving goals. It involves taking ownership of one's actions, decisions, and consequences, and continuously striving to [...]

Responsibility is a fundamental aspect of human life that shapes our interactions, decisions, and contributions to society. It is a concept that encompasses accountability, reliability, and the understanding of the consequences [...]

Responsibility is a concept that guides our actions and behaviors in our personal, professional, and social lives. It is the ability to respond to our obligations, duties, and commitments in a manner that reflects our values and [...]

Guilt is a complex and multifaceted emotion that plays a crucial role in our moral development and overall well-being. It is an essential component of our conscience and helps to regulate our behavior, guiding us to make ethical [...]

In societies and communities, there is a need for social order in institutions and traditions in order to keep the society together and operate cooperatively preventing it from falling apart. Social order is what holds the [...]

Individual Social Responsibility is a moral belief where we as individuals, have a responsibility toward society. Being “socially responsible” is about all individuals behaving ethically and sensitively towards social, economic, [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

• Tools and Resources
• Customer Services
• Business Education
• Business Law
• Business Policy and Strategy
• Entrepreneurship
• Human Resource Management
• Information Systems
• International Business
• Negotiations and Bargaining
• Operations Management
• Organization Theory
• Organizational Behavior
• Problem Solving and Creativity
• Research Methods
• Social Issues
• Technology and Innovation Management
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Corporate social responsibility.

• Abagail McWilliams Abagail McWilliams College of Business Administration, University of Illinois at Chicago
• https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190224851.013.12
• Published online: 28 February 2020

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a legitimate responsibility to society, based on the principle that corporations should share some of the benefit that accrues from the control of vast resources. CSR goes beyond the legal, ethical, and financial obligations that create profits.

In the research literature, corporate social responsibility is defined in a variety of ways, depending on the aspect of CSR being examined. An inclusive definition is that social responsibility requires the firm to take into account the interests of all stakeholders, where stakeholders are defined as everyone who affects or is affected by the firm’s decisions and actions. A firm-focused definition holds that social responsibility includes actions that further a social goal, beyond what is required by ethics, law, and profitability. A political economy–oriented definition posits that firms have a responsibility to correct market failures such as negative externalities and government failures such as limits to jurisdiction that result in worker rights violations.

When implemented, altruistic CSR implies that firms provide a social good unrelated to the firms’ business that does not benefit the bottom line. Strategic CSR implies that firms are simultaneously profitable and socially responsible. To achieve this, CSR must be a core value of the firm and must be integrated into processes and products. When employed strategically, CSR can be an element of a differentiation strategy, leading to premium prices, enhanced brand and firm reputation, and supportive community relations. Corporate environmental responsibility often takes the form of overcompliance with regulation, improving the environment more than is required. A primary benefit of this is to stave off further regulation.

To capture the benefits of being socially responsible, the firm must make stakeholders aware of its record. This has led to triple bottom line reporting—that is, reporting about firm performance in terms of profits, people, and the planet. Social enterprises go a step further and make social responsibility the primary goal of the organization.

• corporate environmental responsibility (CER)
• corporate social performance (CSP)
• greenwashing
• overcompliance
• political corporate social responsibility
• psychological benefits
• stakeholders
• strategic CSR
• sustainability
• triple bottom line

Historical Perspective

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) can be thought of as legitimate responsibility to society that goes beyond the legal, ethical, and financial obligations that create profits, based on the principle that corporations should share some of the benefit that accrues from the control of vast resources. Or, more plainly, in market economies corporations can amass great wealth because society protects their right to do so, therefore the corporations owe something back to all of society, not just those engaged in market exchange with the corporations. The world’s resources should benefit the poorest in addition to the wealthiest, and corporations can be the conduit through which resources are befittingly distributed.

When resources are not equitably distributed, the disadvantaged look first to the government for help and support. But when the government hasn’t the resources, the will, or either, it cannot provide adequately for those in need and may engineer public policy to require businesses to be responsible.

The idea that corporations should act responsibly dates back to the inception of industrialization. With industrialization, the poor were often driven off the land and into cities to look for employment. The available employment, however, did not pay a living wage for an individual, let alone a family. This led to crushing poverty, ill health, and short lives for the working poor. Some industries employed young children, and low pay and inhumane working conditions were common (Marx & Engels, 1967 ). In general, governments didn’t have the will to require firms to act responsibly toward exploited groups. However, in 1833 , the English Parliament passed Lord Althorp’s Factory Act, which effectively regulated child labor in the textile industry in England. Responsible behavior was forced upon rich industrialists, but more importantly the act established the right of government to regulate industry for a clear social purpose (Marvel, 1977 ).

A hundred years after the passage of the first effective industrial regulation, the plight of the disadvantaged was not much improved. The Great Depression highlighted the resource disparities inherent in industrialized economies and triggered attention to the lack of social responsibility displayed by wealthy corporations. But World War II intervened, and the focus turned away from social needs and toward supplying the military. After the war ended and throughout the 1950s, economies turned to modernization and, in much of the world, replacement of lost industrial capacity. It was a time of great prosperity in industrial nations, but, as before, the benefits of prosperity were not equally distributed. The politically weak, including women and minorities, didn’t garner much of the benefits.

In the 1960s there was intense focus on social problems, including disparity of opportunity as well as disparity of resources. It was clear that disadvantaged groups did not have equal access to resources, many of which were controlled by corporations for the benefit of their shareholders. As women and minorities gained political power, calls for corporations to be socially responsible became more direct and visible.

Definitions

There are myriad definitions of corporate social responsibility, a few of which follow. In a managerial context, McWilliams and Siegel ( 2001 , p. 117) define corporate social responsibility as “actions that appear to further some social good, beyond the interests of the firm and that which is required by law.” From an economic perspective, Lundgren ( 2011 , p. 70) defines corporate social responsibility as “actions that, to some degree, imply corporate beyond-compliance behavior in the social and/or the environmental arena,” and Bénabou and Tirole ( 2010 , p. 2) define corporate social responsibility as “sacrificing profits in the social interest.” From a political economy viewpoint, Heal ( 2005 , p. 387) defines corporate social responsibility as “a programme of actions to reduce externalized costs or to avoid distributional conflicts.” The examples go on, with Dahlsrud examining 37 of them and concluding that “Although they apply different phrases, the definitions are predominantly congruent, making the lack of one universally accepted definition less problematic than it might seem at first glance ( 2008 , p. 6).” In a discussion of why there is no definitive definition of corporate social responsibility, McWilliams, Rupp, Siegel, Stahl, and Waldman ( 2019 , p. 3) speculate that “Targeted definitions allow researchers to focus on an area of study such as the environment or stakeholders, or on processes such as operations or strategy, while broad definitions allow interdisciplinary discourse on the motivations and ramifications of CSR.”

Beyond defining what corporate social responsibility is, it is helpful to clarify related terms that are sometimes confused with corporate social responsibility.

Compliance, Ethics, and the Triple Bottom Line

The terms compliance, ethics, and corporate social responsibility are often used interchangeably, but mistakenly so. Carroll’s pyramid of responsibilities is a good guide for separating the concepts. According to Carroll, compliance is a legal requirement, while ethics is the requirement to do no harm, and corporate social responsibility is the expectation for corporations to go beyond compliance and ethics and do good for society, creating social value (Carroll, 1991 ).

But being socially responsible and being irresponsible are not mirror images of each other. That is, being socially responsible is not just the absence of irresponsibility, and neither is social irresponsibility simply the absence of being responsible. Failing to meet any of the three explicit requirements of fiscal responsibility, laws, and ethics is irresponsible management. But meeting all three of these responsibilities does not rise to being socially responsible. Between irresponsible and socially responsible is the state of meeting fiscal, legal, and ethical responsibilities while not going the extra mile to create social good. This can be called socially neutral.

Corporate social responsibility is sometimes referred to as balancing the triple bottom line: profits, people, and the planet. The triple bottom line incorporates the idea of economic, social, and environmental concerns for which a corporation may have responsibility. A corporation that measures its performance against a triple bottom line explicitly promotes a broader responsibility than that of profit maximization and uses triple bottom line performance to convey to internal and external stakeholders that the corporation is being socially responsible in its decisions and operations.

Theoretical Perspectives

Conventional exclusionary view.

Nobel Prize–winning economist Milton Friedman argued that the responsibility of business is to maximize profits for the benefit of the owners (shareholders), within ethical and legal boundaries. Responsibility for social programs, he argued, rightfully adheres to elected officials (Friedman, 1970 ).

Arrow ( 1973 ) challenged Friedman’s broad conclusion that corporations have no responsibilities beyond profit maximization on two counts. Count one is that production often generates negative externalities (such as air and water pollution) that are not appropriately priced in the market. Count two is that there is asymmetric information between producers and consumers. Producers have more knowledge about the true quality (and therefore true value) of products than do the consumers who purchase them. Arrow concludes these two market imperfections create a social responsibility for corporations because, while externalities are sometimes regulated by government, asymmetric information is not, and both can be addressed more efficiently by corporations than by governments.

Heal ( 2005 ) offers an updated perspective of corporate social responsibility that builds on Arrow, adding the risk of protests, such as Occupy Wall Street, to Arrow’s challenge of Friedman. Heal proposes that corporate social responsibility programs (such as corporate environmentalism) can reduce externalities and also ward off conflicts and demands for distributive justice, such as Black Lives Matter (Schulz, 2017 ). Arrow and Heal’s arguments also provide a basis for stakeholder theory.

Inclusive View

Stakeholder theory challenges the assumption that shareholders have the only valid claim on the resources controlled by corporations. Freeman and Reed ( 1983 ) argue that any group that affects or is affected by the behavior of the corporation is a stakeholder whose interests should be considered in corporate decision-making. As corporations increasingly acknowledged responsibilities beyond profit maximization, stakeholder management became a means of enhancing firms’ reputations and improving community relations, and stakeholder theory became a dominant logic in corporate social responsibility. Incorporating stakeholder theory into strategic management has resulted in stakeholder analysis being directed at helping managers identify stakeholders and prioritize claims on corporate resources (Chandler, 2017 ).

Carroll ( 1991 ) repudiates Friedman’s conclusion that corporations have no social responsibility. He proposes a normative model of corporations as organizations with multiple responsibilities: economic/fiscal, legal, ethical, and philanthropic. The economic responsibility is necessary for survival, legal responsibility is required for legitimacy, ethical responsibility is required to do no harm, and philanthropic responsibilities are expected of a good corporate citizen. Carroll depicts the responsibilities as a pyramid, with profitability as the base, followed by legal, then ethical and finally philanthropic as the pinnacle. Carroll’s characterization of corporate responsibility is that it includes all four categories, including the philanthropic contributions to the community to promote social good. However, philanthropy differs in being expected, but not required.

Economic View

To explain the link between corporate social responsibility and profitability, McWilliams and Siegel ( 2001 ) take a micro-economic–based theory of the firm perspective. From this perspective, they assume that corporate managers seek to maximize profits and ask the question: How can managers determine the optimal amount of investment to make in corporate social responsibility, that is, how can they determine the amount of investment in corporate social responsibility that is consistent with profit maximization? They propose that corporate social responsibility can be a component of a differentiation strategy. Consumers demonstrate a demand for socially responsible products (e.g., LED lights, free trade coffee, hybrid vehicles) and production processes (e.g., animal-free testing, green production, organic farming), and firms respond by adding the demanded socially responsible characteristics, thereby creating a differentiated product. The added costs of differentiating the product lead to premium prices. McWilliams and Siegel ( 2001 ) therefore conclude that, because the investment in corporate social responsibility supports the firm’s differentiation strategy, it should be treated the same as any strategic investment. To maximize profits, the corporation should invest up to the point where the additional cost of corporate social responsibility is equal to the additional revenue generated by corporate social responsibility.

Lundgren ( 2011 ) provides a formal, mathematical model of corporate social responsibility at the firm level based on micro-economic theory. He proposes that the costs of socially responsible programs can be offset by the increased revenues from consumers who value corporate social responsibility and the increased market value generated by investors who value corporate social responsibility. He explicitly models goodwill capital, an intangible asset, as a primary benefit of corporate social responsibility, tying corporate social responsibility explicitly to firm value and potential profitability.

Corporate social responsibility can also be conceptualized as a form of reputation insurance that protects the firm’s reputation when adverse events occur (Minor & Morgan, 2011 ). Adverse events, such as the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill, are especially costly because they include both direct cost—such as fines, legal costs, and compensation to injured parties—and the indirect costs associated with loss of corporate reputation (Mejri & DeWolf, 2013 ). Loss of reputation can affect stock price, financing terms, and future revenue far into the future. When an adverse event occurs, external stakeholders will make judgments about what went wrong. They may decide that the adverse event was the result of poor management and downgrade the reputation of the firm or they may decide that the event was just bad luck and not recalibrate the reputation of the firm. Being known for corporate social responsibility can sway external judgments in favor of management and the firm, protecting the firm’s reputation and significantly lowering the indirect costs of such an event.

Political View

Bagnoli and Watts ( 2003 ) characterize corporate social responsibility as the private provision (by the corporation) of a public good (such as pollution abatement). Building on this, Scherer and Palazzo ( 2011 ) propose that globalization of business has resulted in political, rather than normative or economic, corporate social responsibility. They point out that laws and regulations are enforced within national boundaries, while social problems know no boundaries and negative externalities (such as air pollution) cross boundaries. The void in global governance may be (perhaps by necessity) addressed by businesses, especially multinational corporations. According to Scherer and Palazzo ( 2011 ), political corporate social responsibility suggests that corporations will contribute to global regulation (such as sustainability or workplace safety) and provide public goods (such as human rights protections and community wellness programs).

Bénabou and Tirole ( 2010 ) characterize corporate social responsibility as a response to government failure. They discuss three ways in which governments fail: capture by special interest groups, limits to jurisdiction, and poor information and inefficiency.

In addressing the problem of limited jurisdiction, Christmann ( 2004 ) suggested that multinationals will embrace a global strategy so that they can transfer best practices of social responsibility across boundaries, effectively creating global standards. Multinational corporations that enforce the same standards everywhere they operate may be merely complying with regulation in their home country but being socially responsible in countries with lower standards. Implementing the same standards globally allows multinational corporations to be more efficient by taking advantage of scale economies and also benefiting from reputation insurance.

McWilliams and Siegel ( 2011 ) reject Baron’s view that motivation determines what is socially responsible behavior and, in contrast, argue that social responsibility that is motivated by profitability can reconcile Friedman’s view of the profit maximization responsibility of the firm with that of social responsibility. That is, by being socially responsible, firms can attend to the bottom line (profits) while also creating social good. This is known as strategic corporate social responsibility, a term introduced by Burke and Logsdon ( 1996 ). To the extent that corporations are meeting expectations of stakeholders, strategic corporate social responsibility disputes Friedman’s view that social responsibility adheres to public officials. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, “Strategic behaviour is the general term for actions taken by firms which are intended to influence the market in which they compete. Strategic behavior includes actions to influence rivals to act cooperatively so as to raise joint profits, as well as non-cooperative actions to raise the firm’s profits at the expense of rivals” (OECD, 2007 , p. 751).

McWilliams and Siegel ( 2001 ) concluded that firms can respond to demands for corporate social responsibility by incorporating social responsibility into a differentiation strategy. The firm differentiates its products/services to include CSR attributes, as well as incorporating CSR into firm processes. Differentiation should allow the firm to charge premium prices to cover additional costs of providing the socially responsible attributes.

However, when asymmetric information allows firms that do not engage in corporate social responsibility to position their products as similar to those that do embody corporate social responsibility, the socially responsible firm may face a competitive disadvantage. The socially responsible firm invests in corporate social responsibility but cannot charge more than the firms that do not. In this situation, the socially responsible firms may be forced to lobby their government for legally enforceable standards that apply to all firms in the industry (Heslin & Ochoa, 2008 ). Conversely, some firms will lobby for standards that cost their competitors more to meet than they cost the lobbying firm. The lobbying firm can create a competitive advantage by masking competitive behavior as social responsibility (McWilliams, Van Fleet, & Cory, 2002 ).

An important distinction of strategic corporate social responsibility is that it is embedded in the corporation’s operations, processes, and core competencies (Aguinis & Glavas, 2013 ), regardless of whether it is implicit as was more conventional in European companies or explicit as in U.S. companies (Matten & Moon, 2008 ). Embedding corporate social responsibility allows for synergistic effects, such as when a steel company uses its core competency in plant design and construction to build plants that are more efficient and use less energy (i.e., are environmentally responsible). Linking the corporation’s social responsibility to its core competencies can produce maximum social benefit. Being explicit and transparent about its corporate social responsibility also enables and enhances positive effects on firm reputation (Servaes & Tamayo, 2013 ).

Corporate social responsibility can be a long-term strategic asset that enhances reputation and brand image. As such, it can lead to customer loyalty and repeat sales and, in some industries, premium prices. Originally thought to only support a differentiation strategy, we now see corporate social responsibility prominently reported by low-cost-leader companies in business-to-business and commodity industries (Nucor, 2018 ). This indicates that while corporate social responsibility can support premium pricing, it also can result in lower costs, such as lower financing costs, lower legal costs, or lower turnover costs, as well as a higher-quality, better-motivated workforce (Sprinkle & Maines, 2010 ). Therefore, strategic corporate social responsibility can support a low-cost-leader strategy when embedded in the core competencies that create low-cost advantage.

However, corporate social responsibility activities will create benefits for the corporation only if they are effectively and honestly communicated to internal and external stakeholders (Lee, Oh, & Kim, 2013 ). When the corporation appears to be claiming to do more than it actually does, employees and consumers quickly become jaded and remain skeptical of future corporate social responsibility claims. Therefore, corporations must be forthright about their social responsibility so as to not generate or escalate skepticism.

Environmental

Environmental responsibility is one of the fastest growing areas of corporate social responsibility worldwide. Because compliance with environmental standards is a legal responsibility, being socially responsible means overcompliance. Corporate environmentalism is sometimes referred to as corporate environmental responsibility.

In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was created by executive order in 1970 and made responsible for enforcing environmental laws. Early regulation was command and control: the EPA set standards and mandated how corporations complied. Over time, more attention was paid to gathering and disseminating information, and corporations moved to design solutions that met standards in more efficient/cost-effective ways, providing a springboard for corporate environmentalism.

Maxwell, Lyon, and Hackett ( 2000 ) couched corporate environmentalism as strategic self-regulation to preempt political action. They find that the threat of increased regulation is sufficient to prompt corporations to overcomply with existing environmental regulation. Because political action is costly for the firm and for the activists, it makes sense for firms to overcomply to fend off political action, benefiting both the corporation and the environment.

Voluntary environmental reporting such as the Global Reporting Initiative of 1997 encourages corporations to overcomply with environmental regulations and to actively engage in corporate environmentalism (Sheehy, 2019 ) to enhance firm reputation and brand. A reputation for environmentalism can result in many benefits, including attracting environmentally conscious consumers and investors (Lyon & Maxwell, 2008 ), the aforementioned preemption of regulation, and lower legal and financing costs. This last is a result of the lower probability that the firm will incur legal costs as a result of violating environmental standards, such as those tied to oil spills and poisonous gas leaks, since the internal target exceeds the legal regulation (Sheehy, 2019 ).

Environmental laws and regulations differ around the globe, requiring firms to be aware of local regulations but also providing them with opportunities to search for favorable (presumably less stringent) standards. However, Dowell, Hart, and Yeung ( 2000 ) found that firms that enforce the most stringent regulations worldwide are most successful. Additionally, Nidumolu, Prahalad, and Rangaswami ( 2009 ) found that corporations that innovate ahead of increasing standards have time to experiment and test new solutions and that corporations that enforce a single standard worldwide can take advantage of scale economies.

Conversely, corporate environmentalism branding can have serious negative consequences if not designed and implemented properly. Firms that fail to deliver on their environmental claims can be charged with “greenwashing,” that is, overstating their environmentalism. A particularly insidious form of “greenwashing” takes place when a corporation masks its true environmental performance by engaging in selective disclosure of benign impacts rather than full disclosure (Marquis, Toffel, & Zhou, 2016 ). In an empirical study of “greenwashing,” Walker and Wan ( 2012 ) demonstrated that claiming to be green (i.e., environmentally responsible) without actual green behavior negatively affects a corporation’s financial performance.

Sustainability

Corporate environmentalism increasingly embraces sustainability, which is a more comprehensive program of environmental stewardship. Sustainability requires attention to global and intergenerational effects of corporate operations.

According to the 1987 UN Brundtland report (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987 ), “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” is sustainable. From this, one can extrapolate a definition of corporate environmental sustainability that incorporates a universal dimension—not just a clean environment where the corporation operates now, but a global and intergenerational one. That is, socially responsible corporations must consider the effects of current operations on the environment both now and in the future. They must also balance current and future economic and equity responsibilities.

Sustainability implies more than environmental impact management: all resources must be managed to ensure sustainability. Corporations must be mindful of how they manage farm land, forests, ocean fish stocks, animal and plant breeding, and valuable minerals, as well as how they can support sustainable development in developing economies. Hart ( 2010 ) coined the phrase “sustainable global enterprise” to label multinational enterprises that deliver economic, social, and environmental benefits across all their global operations. An example of a sustainable global enterprise is a multinational food company that “has implemented living wage standards for all of its farm workers in every country in which it harvests fruit, and which has introduced state-of-the-art environmental practices throughout its supply chain” (Aguilera, Rupp, Williams, & Ganapathi, 2007 , p. 838).

Nidumolu et al. ( 2009 ) studied sustainability initiatives of multinational corporations and found that embracing sustainability led to innovation that creates better products and new businesses, increases brand loyalty, and reduces costs—contributing to both the top line (revenue) and bottom line (profitability) of the corporation. Consumers perceive that products that are produced sustainably or have sustainable characteristics are better products and, therefore, worth more. New revenue streams can come from businesses created by recycling and reusing products that have exhausted their original purpose. Additional revenue is generated when consumers develop brand loyalty through their experience with sustainable products. Cost reductions come from using fewer inputs in all parts of the value chain (from raw materials, through production and distribution to final sales). Additionally, firms that anticipate increasing environmental regulation can innovate ahead of their competitors and reap first-mover advantages. All of these increase the bottom line as well as being socially responsible.

Social Enterprise

The simplest type of corporate social responsibility is philanthropy, where a corporation donates part of its profits to programs that address social problems. The inner workings of the firm, its organization, its mission, its strategy, etc., are unaffected by the goals of the programs that receive financial support.

The social goods produced by the financially supported programs can be peripheral to the corporation. Some corporations that engage in strategic corporate social responsibility explicitly align social goods produced with other strategic components of the firm. For example, firms may have “buy one–give one” program where customers buy a branded product (e.g., a pair of shoes) and the firm gives one (pair of shoes) to a child in need. The social mission is less peripheral to profit-making.

Social enterprises go one step further than that and make their social mission part of the firm’s core. Defourny and Nyssens ( 2008 , p. 202) define social enterprises as “not-for-profit private organizations providing goods or services directly related to their explicit aim to benefit the community.”

One type of social enterprise is a benefit corporation, which is a legal business entity that is required to have a social mission at its core (Hiller, 2013 ). In the United States, the need for a new legal form of for-profit that explicitly recognizes a social mission led to laws in some states that allow for benefit corporations. These corporations must declare themselves as such in their articles of incorporation and are required to submit to review by an independent third party to confirm that they are fulfilling their social mission. It should be noted that the independent review of the impact of benefit corporations is holistic—that is, it comprises all of the effects of the corporation on society, not merely its effect on selected areas such as profitability and environmentalism (B Lab Company, 2017 ). This is in contrast to standard corporations, which can legally engage in “greenwashing,” promoting corporate social responsibility activities while simultaneously obfuscating socially irresponsible actions (Marquis et al., 2016 ; Walker & Wan, 2012 ).

Another type of social enterprise is social entrepreneurship, which is an “innovative, social value creating activity that can occur within or across the nonprofit, business, or government sectors” (Austin, Stevenson, & Wei-Skillern, 2012 , p. 371). While the social mission is always core to social entrepreneurship, it is not always obviously so, because it may be either explicit or implicit. In social entrepreneurship for the disadvantaged the social mission is explicit, that is, benefits (such as jobs) are provided to the disadvantaged. In social entrepreneurship by the disadvantaged, there is an implicit social mission of improving the (disadvantaged) entrepreneur’s circumstances, irrespective of whether there is an explicit social mission, such as providing jobs for others who are disadvantaged (Renko & Freeman, 2019 ).

The implicit social mission of entrepreneurship by the disadvantaged provides a conduit for social good created by corporate social responsibility programs, making support of entrepreneurship an attractive option for firms that engage with disadvantaged populations. For example, multinational corporations in Africa are adding to their corporate social responsibility portfolios the support of entrepreneurship in disadvantaged economies through education, training, and skills development initiatives (DeBerry-Spence, Torres, & Hinson, 2019 ).

The Business Case

The business case for corporate social responsibility refers to the belief that there is a causal link between being socially responsible and achieving profitability. It is argued that firms that do good (for society) will do well (be more profitable and have higher market value). In the context of corporate social responsibility, “doing well” can be the result of many advantages, such as premium pricing, repeat sales, higher employee productivity, lower cost of capital, or lower legal costs, all of which may translate into higher profitability and firm value in either the short run or the long run. Determining if firms “do good” is more problematic but is generally referred to as corporate social performance, which Wood defines as “a business organization’s configuration of principles of social responsibility, processes of social responsiveness, and policies, programs, and observable outcomes as they relate to the firm’s societal relationships” ( 1991 , p. 693). Two widely used measures of corporate social performance are the Fortune Corporate Reputation Index and the Kinder, Lydenberg and Domini (KLD) index of reputation (Fombrun, Gardberg, & Sever, 2000 ).

In the 1990s the business case for corporate social responsibility (doing well by doing good) became a dominant theme in academic research. Countless empirical studies attempted to show a causal link between corporate social responsibility and corporate financial performance. These studies were hampered by difficulties in defining and measuring corporate social performance, often leading to inconsistent results (Margolis & Walsh, 2003 ) and sometimes suffering from lack of methodological rigor (McWilliams & Siegel, 2000 ). Barnett ( 2007 ) concludes that there is no universal evidence of doing well by doing good, because doing well is contingent upon the corporation, the timing, and the particular socially responsible investment. He suggests that academic research should focus on figuring out when, where, and what type of social responsibility will allow corporations to do well by doing good. Carroll and Shabana ( 2010 , p. 101) support Barnett’s findings and conclude that “the benefits of CSR are not homogeneous, and effective CSR initiatives are not generic.”

Although meta-analyses have been conducted (e.g., Friede, Busch, & Bassen, 2015 ) in an attempt to make sense of the inconsistent results of earlier studies, the inclusion of criticized empirical studies and the bias toward publishing only studies that have statistically significant results makes the results of meta-analyses problematic. Given the inherent difficulties of testing the business case for corporate social responsibility, including, “the inaccessibility, both apparent and actual, of good data” (Wood, 2010 , p. 75) and the lack of consensus on appropriate methodology, academic research has subsequently moved beyond trying to empirically verify a causal link between corporate social responsibility and profitability to accepting that corporations have social responsibilities and examining how such responsibilities can be met to the advantage of the corporation and society, ultimately arriving at the concept of strategic corporate social responsibility.

Non-Pecuniary Benefits

Although it’s difficult to separate out and quantify the effects of corporate social responsibility on firm performance, the effects on individuals can be measured directly by survey methodology. Therefore, we have better evidence of the non-pecuniary effects of corporate social responsibility than we have of corporate social performance. Corporate social responsibility is by definition about the corporation, but it is individuals who make decisions, carry out corporate social responsibility programs, and are affected by corporate actions. Stakeholders such as managers, employees, consumers, investors, and community members can shape and be shaped by corporate social responsibility activity and consequently often receive psychological benefits from their association with socially responsible corporations. The psychological benefits generated by these associations with the corporation are a component of the social value created by corporations that engage in corporate social responsibility.

Internal Stakeholders

Internal stakeholders include managers, employees, and board members, all of whom may affect or be affected by the firm’s social responsibility programs, processes, and reputation. Corporate social responsibility can be initiated by managers for personal reasons, including personal values, religious beliefs, commitment to social causes, professional image building, or a need to feel good about themselves (Hemingway & Maclagan, 2004 ). Manager-initiated corporate social responsibility can be either strategic or philanthropic, depending on the constraints of corporate governance, firm strategic orientation, and the availability of discretionary funds. Managers receive a psychological benefit when they can support their personal values, religious beliefs, or identity. It is common for large corporations to have social responsibility officers who shape the culture and reputation of the firm, maintain corporate social responsibility programs, and communicate to internal and external stakeholders. These executives have more opportunity to reap social and psychological benefits from corporate social responsibility.

In general, people desire to have meaning in their lives and often look for meaning in their work. Aguinis and Glavas ( 2019 ) explored how corporate social responsibility can help employees find meaning in their work. The closer the fit between the corporation’s identity and the employee’s identity, the more meaningful the work will seem. For example, a person who identifies as a caregiver will find meaningfulness in their work in a hospital. Corporate social responsibility programs provide additional information and experience that can help workers find more meaning in their work, that is, they may perceive that their work can serve a greater purpose.

Corporate social responsibility can affect employees’ perceptions and attitudes about their work and workplace. Gavin and Maynard ( 1975 ) tested the relationship between the employee’s perception of the corporation’s concern for the environment and the employee’s general satisfaction with their employment. They found that employees tended to report more satisfaction the greater the perceived corporate concern for the environment. Perhaps more telling, they found that the younger workers in the 1970s were most concerned about corporate environmentalism, which perhaps foretold increasing environmental awareness and activism.

Chong ( 2009 ) examined how participation in corporate social responsibility programs affect employee’s understanding and commitment to the corporation’s identity, where organization identity can be defined as “the set of meanings by which a company allows itself to be known and through which it allows people to describe, remember and relate to it” (Wheeler, Richey, Tokkman, & Sablynski, 2006 , p. 98). Chong found that participation in corporate social responsibility programs feeds off of and reinforces corporate identity, resulting in the employee experiencing higher motivation, satisfaction, and commitment to the corporation.

Mozes, Josman, and Yaniv ( 2011 ) studied the relationship between corporate social responsibility activity and both organizational identification (a driver of loyalty) and motivation to work. Workers in their study were classified as either active participants or non-active participants in volunteerism programs. Active participants demonstrated higher levels of organizational identification and motivation to work. To be most effective for external beneficiaries and most meaningful for the employees, corporate social responsibility must be embedded in the routines and processes of the organization (Aguinis & Glavas, 2013 ).

Meister ( 2012 ) found that 53% of workers surveyed by the nonprofit Net Impact reported that having a job where they can make a difference to society is important to their happiness. Further, 72% of students getting ready to enter the workforce also felt this way. According to Meister, to recruit and retain young top talent, corporations not only have to engage in corporate social responsibility, they must communicate their engagement through social media.

External Stakeholders

External stakeholders may be affected by the firm’s social responsibility programs, processes, or products, but as outsiders they do not affect these. External stakeholders include consumers, suppliers, investors, and community.

Consumers derive psychological value from purchasing socially responsible products. According to Green and Peloza ( 2011 ) there are three categories of benefit: emotional, social, and functional. Buying products from socially responsible companies allows consumers to feel good about themselves. This emotional response can be associated with companies that make charitable contributions to social causes. Consumers feels good about themselves (emotional benefit) for buying from a company that is altruistic. Alternatively, buying products from a socially responsible company can define the consumer as a good person to others and elevate their position in the community (social benefit). This social response can be associated with companies that champion a social cause such as environmental sustainability. Functional benefit comes from purchasing products that function better because of CSR attributes, such as fuel-efficient cars. The three types of benefit can work together and amplify each other. “For example, a hybrid vehicle can provide functional value (lower operating costs), emotional value (joy in saving or environmental stewardship), and social value (meeting relevant norms)” (Green & Peloza, 2011 , p. 52). For consumers to derive value from corporate social responsibility, they must be aware of it. Corporations traditionally used company reports, web pages, and advertising to make consumers aware of their corporate social responsibility but are now feeling pressure to communicate more broadly and often over social media.

Socially responsible investing provides psychological value to investors. According to Beal, Goyen, and Philips ( 2005 ), this value can take the form of “fun of participation” similar to what gamblers experience, or it can take the form of happiness similar to that generated by pleasurable activities. Psychological value augments the financial returns to socially responsible investments and helps explain the decision to invest in screened funds. According to Dam and Scholtens ( 2015 , p. 104), “consumers receive a warm-glow” when they invest responsibly.

Benefits to Investors

Investing in socially responsible firms, commonly referred to as socially responsible investing (SRI), is a way for investors to join their values and their desire for monetary gain. This has become easier for individual and institutional investors with the growth of mutual funds focused on socially responsible investing. At the start of 2018 there was over $30 trillion invested in socially responsible stock, with nearly half this amount held in Europe (Global Sustainable Investment Alliance, 2019 ). In the United States there are mutual funds that filter for social responsibility, allowing individual and institutional investors to encourage socially responsible corporations while withholding support from firms that engage in industries (such as gambling) or activities (such as genetic modification) that are not viewed as socially responsible. Because perceptions of what is socially responsible and what is not can vary, mutual fund managers develop screens to appeal to different viewpoints and choose stock of firms that meet the criteria of the screen but also meet the criteria for firm/stock performance. Several empirical studies comparing the returns to socially responsible funds and unrestricted funds have found that there is no systematic difference (e.g., Bauer, Koedijk, & Otten, 2005 ; Hamilton, Jo, & Statman, 1993 ; Sauer, 1997 ). In a meta-analysis of earlier studies, Revelli and Viviani ( 2015 , p. 158) found that “the consideration of corporate social responsibility in stock market portfolios is neither a weakness nor a strength compared with conventional investments.” On average the returns to SRI funds are the same as the returns to unrestricted funds, making SRI funds attractive to both individual and institutional investors because they combine competitive financial returns with psychological benefits (feeling good about oneself for being socially responsible).

Other avenues for socially responsible investing include individual stocks (with the opportunity to engage directly with the corporation) and community development financial institutions which engage in socially responsible investing by providing loans to small businesses in low-income, at-risk communities who otherwise would not have access to financing (Schueth, 2003 ).

Corporate social responsibility is a well-researched and thoroughly discussed topic. While there is general consensus among researchers and commentators that corporations have responsibilities to society that go beyond profit maximization, what those responsibilities are and how they should be met are still open questions. Stakeholder theory, Carroll’s pyramid of corporate responsibilities, micro-economic theory of the firm, altruistic and strategic corporate social responsibility, corporate self-regulation, political corporate social responsibility, corporate environmentalism, and sustainability all offer insights into the responsibilities of corporations and how those responsibilities may be met.

When viewed from the perspective of the firm, the evidence of corporate social responsibility has generally been about the link between corporate social performance and financial performance or firm value, with mixed results. But financial effects are not the only effects of corporate social responsibility. Individuals experience psychological effects that are also a part of the social good created by socially responsible corporations. Researchers have reported significant effects, including:

Workers find meaning in their work and experience higher motivation, satisfactionm and commitment to the firm.

Consumers feel good about themselves.

Investors get a warm glow from supporting socially responsible firms.

We have abundant information about what is and isn’t corporate social responsibility, how corporate social responsibility benefits corporations and individuals, and how investors can encourage socially responsible corporations and discourage irresponsible corporations. However, we know less about how corporations can address social problems such as human rights, justice, poverty, and environmental sustainability and next to nothing about the record of corporate social responsibility in addressing such social problems.

• Aguilera, R. V. , Rupp, D. E. , Williams, C. A. , & Ganapathi, J. (2007). Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: A multilevel theory of social change in organizations. Academy of Management Review , 32 (3), 836–863.
• Aguinis, H. , & Glavas, A. (2013). Embedded versus peripheral corporate social responsibility: Psychological foundations . Industrial and Organizational Psychology , 6 (04), 314–332.
• Aguinis, H. , & Glavas, A. (2019). On corporate social responsibility, sensemaking, and the search for meaningfulness through work. Journal of Management , 45 (3), 1057–1086.
• Arrow, K. J. (1973). Social responsibility and economic efficiency. Public Policy , 21 (3), 303–17.
• Austin, J. , Stevenson, H. , & Wei-Skillern, J. (2012). Social and commercial entrepreneurship: Same, different, or both? Revista de Administração , 47 (3), 370–384.
• B Lab Company . (2017). Model benefit corporation legislation (model legislation) .
• Bagnoli, M. , & Watts, S. G. (2003). Selling to socially responsible consumers: Competition and the private provision of public goods . Journal of Economics & Management Strategy , 12 (3), 419–445.
• Barnett, M. L. (2007). Stakeholder influence capacity and the variability of financial returns to corporate social responsibility . Academy of Management Review , 32 (3), 794–816.
• Baron, D. P. (2001). Private politics, corporate social responsibility, and integrated strategy. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy , 10 (1), 7–45.
• Bauer, R. , Koedijk, K. , & Otten, R. (2005). International evidence on ethical mutual fund performance and investment style . Journal of Banking & Finance , 29 (7), 1751–1767.
• Beal, D. J. , Goyen, M. , & Philips, P. (2005). Why do we invest ethically? Journal of Investing , 14 (3), 66–78.
• Bénabou, R. , & Tirole, J. (2010). Individual and corporate social responsibility . Economica , 77 (305), 1–19.
• Burke, L. , & Logsdon, J. M. (1996). How corporate social responsibility pays off . Long Range Planning , 29 (4), 495–502.
• Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders . Business Horizons , 34 (4), 39–48.
• Carroll, A. B. (2016). Carroll’s pyramid of CSR: Taking another look . International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility , 1 (1), 3.
• Carroll, A. B. , & Shabana, K. M. (2010). The business case for corporate social responsibility: A review of concepts, research and practice . International Journal of Management Reviews , 12 (1), 85–105.
• Chandler, D. (2017). Strategic corporate social responsibility (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Chong, M. (2009). Employee participation in CSR and corporate identity: Insights from a disaster-response program in the Asia-Pacific . Corporate Reputation Review , 12 (2), 106–119.
• Christmann, P. (2004). Multinational companies and the natural environment: Determinants of global environmental policy standardization . Academy of Management Journal , 47 (5), 747–760.
• Dam, L. , & Scholtens, B. (2015). Toward a theory of responsible investing: On the economic foundations of corporate social responsibility . Resource and Energy Economics , 41 , 103–121.
• DeBerry-Spence, B. , Torres, L. T. , & Hinson, R. E. (2019). Bringing together the big and the small: Multinational corporation approaches to corporate social responsibility and entrepreneurship in Africa. In A. McWilliams , D. Rupp , D. Siegel , G. Stahl , & D. Waldman (Eds.), Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility: Psychological and organizational perspectives (pp. 391–411). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Defourny, J. , & Nyssens, M. (2008). Social enterprise in Europe: Recent trends and developments . Social Enterprise Journal , 4 (3), 202–228.
• Dowell, G. , Hart, S. , & Yeung, B. (2000). Do corporate global environmental standards create or destroy market value? Management Science , 46 (8), 1059–1074.
• Fombrun, C. J. , Gardberg, N. A. , & Sever, J. M. (2000). The Reputation Quotient SM : A multi-stakeholder measure of corporate reputation . Journal of Brand Management , 7 (4), 241–255.
• Freeman, R. E. , & Reed, D. L. (1983). Stockholders and stakeholders: A new perspective on corporate governance. California Management Review , 25 (3), 88–106.
• Friede, G. , Busch, T. , & Bassen, A. (2015). ESG and financial performance: Aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies . Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment , 5 (4), 210–233.
• Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Times Magazine , September 13, 122–126.
• Gavin, J. F. , & Maynard, W. S. (1975). Perceptions of corporate social responsibility. Personnel Psychology , 28 (3), 377–387.
• Global Sustainable Investment Alliance . (2019). 2018 Global Sustainable Investment Review .
• Green, T. , & Peloza, J. (2011). How does corporate social responsibility create value for consumers? Journal of Consumer Marketing , 28 (1), 48–56.
• Hamilton, S. , Jo, H. , & Statman, M. (1993). Doing well while doing good? The investment performance of socially responsible mutual funds. Financial Analysts Journal , 49 (6), 62.
• Hart, S. L. (2010). Capitalism at the crossroads: Next generation business strategies for a post-crisis world . Upper Saddle River, N.J.: FT Press.
• Heal, G. (2005). Corporate social responsibility: An economic and financial framework . Geneva Papers on Risk & Insurance—Issues & Practice , 30 (3), 387–409.
• Hemingway, C. A. , & Maclagan, P. W. (2004). Managers’ personal values as drivers of corporate social responsibility . Journal of Business Ethics , 50 (1), 33–44.
• Heslin, P. A. , & Ochoa, J. D. (2008). Understanding and developing strategic corporate social responsibility. Organizational Dynamics , 37 (2), 125–144.
• Hiller, J. S. (2013). The benefit corporation and corporate social responsibility . Journal of Business Ethics , 118 (2), 287–301.
• Lee, K. , Oh, W.-Y. , & Kim, N. (2013). Social media for socially responsible firms: Analysis of fortune 500’s twitter profiles and their CSR/CSIR ratings . Journal of Business Ethics , 118 (4), 791–806.
• Lundgren, T. (2011). A microeconomic model of corporate social responsibility . Metroeconomica , 62 (1), 69–95.
• Lyon, T. P. , & Maxwell, J. W. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and the environment: A theoretical perspective . Review of Environmental Economics and Policy , 2 (2), 240–260.
• Margolis, J. D. , & Walsh, J. P. (2003). Misery loves companies: rethinking social initiatives by business . Administrative Science Quarterly , 48 (2), 268–305.
• Marquis, C. , Toffel, M. W. , & Zhou, Y. (2016). Scrutiny, norms, and selective disclosure: A global study of greenwashing. Organization Science , 27 (2), 483–504.
• Marvel, H. P. (1977). Factory regulation: A reinterpretation of early English experience, Journal of Law & Economics , 20 (2), 379–402.
• Marx, K. , & Engels, F. (1967). Capital: A critique of political economy . New York: International Publishers.
• Matten, D. , & Moon, J. (2008). “Implicit” and “explicit” CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility . Academy of Management Review , 33 (2), 404–424.
• Maxwell, J. W. , Lyon, T. P. , & Hackett, S. C. (2000). Self-regulation and social welfare: The political economy of corporate environmentalism . The Journal of Law & Economics , 43 (2), 583–618.
• McWilliams, A. , Rupp, D. E. , Siegel, D. S. , Stahl, G. K. , & Waldman, D. A. (2019). New developments in the study of corporate social responsibility. In A. McWilliams , D. Rupp , D. Siegel , G. Stahl , & D. Waldman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility: Psychological and organizational perspectives (pp. 3–16). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• McWilliams, A. , & Siegel, D. (2000). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: Correlation or misspecification? Strategic Management Journal , 21 (5), 603–609.
• McWilliams, A. , & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective . Academy of Management Review , 26 (1), 117–127.
• McWilliams, A. , & Siegel, D. S. (2011). Creating and capturing value, strategic corporate social responsibility, resource-based theory, and sustainable competitive advantage . Journal of Management , 37 (5), 1480–1495.
• McWilliams, A. , Van Fleet, D. D. , & Cory, K. D. (2002). Raising rivals’ costs through political strategy: An extension of resource-based theory . Journal of Management Studies , 39 (5), 707–724.
• Meister, J. (2012, June 7). The future of work: Corporate social responsibility attracts top talent . Forbes .
• Mejri, M. , & De Wolf, D. (2013). Crisis management: Lessons learnt from the BP Deepwater Horizon spill oil . Business Management and Strategy , 4 (2), 67.
• Minor, D. , & Morgan, J. (2011). CSR as reputation insurance: Primum non nocere . California Management Review , 53 (3), 40–59.
• Mozes, M. , Josman, Z. , & Yaniv, E. (2011). Corporate social responsibility organizational identification and motivation . Social Responsibility Journal , 7 (2), 310–325.
• Nucor . (2018). Nucor responsibility .
• Nidumolu, R. , Prahalad, C. K. , & Rangaswami, M. R. (2009). Why sustainability is now the key driver of innovation. Harvard Business Review , 87 (9), 57–64.
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) . (2007). glossary of industrial organisation economics and competition law. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development: Centre for Co-operation with the European Economies in Transition.
• Renko, M. , & Freeman, M. (2019). Entrepreneurship by and for disadvantaged populations: Global evidence. In A. McWilliams , D. Rupp , D. Siegel , G. Stahl , & D. Waldman (Eds.), Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility: Psychological and organizational perspectives (pp. 412–429). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Revelli, C. , & Viviani, J.-L. (2015). Financial performance of socially responsible investing (SRI): What have we learned? A meta-analysis . Business Ethics: A European Review , 24 (2), 158–185.
• Sauer, D. A. (1997). The impact of social-responsibility screens on investment performance: Evidence from the Domini 400 social index and Domini Equity Mutual Fund . Review of Financial Economics , 6 (2), 137–149.
• Scherer, A. G. , & Palazzo, G. (2011). The new political role of business in a globalized world: A review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance, and democracy . Journal of Management Studies , 48 (4), 899–931.
• Schueth, S. (2003). Socially responsible investing in the United States . Journal of Business Ethics , 43 (3), 189–194.
• Schulz, M. (2017). An analysis of corporate responses to the Black Lives Matter movement. Elon Journal of Undergraduate Research in Communications , 8 (1), 55–65.
• Servaes, H. , & Tamayo, A. (2013). The impact of corporate social responsibility on firm value: The role of customer awareness. Management Science , 59 (5), 1035–1061.
• Sheehy, B. (2019). CSR and environmental law: Concepts, intersections and limitations. In A. McWilliams , D. Rupp , D. Siegel , G. Stahl , & D. Waldman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility: Psychological and organizational perspectives (pp. 263–282). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Sprinkle, G. B. , & Maines, L. A. (2010). The benefits and costs of corporate social responsibility . Business Horizons , 53 (5), 445–453.
• Walker, K. , & Wan, F. (2012). The harm of symbolic actions and green-washing: Corporate actions and communications on environmental performance and their financial implications . Journal of Business Ethics , 109 (2), 227–242.
• Wheeler, A. R. , Richey, R. G. , Tokkman, M. , & Sablynski, C. J. (2006). Retaining employees for service competency: The role of corporate brand identity . Journal of Brand Management , 14 (1/2), 96–113.
• Wood, D. J. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited . Academy of Management Review , 16 (4), 6.
• Wood, D. J. (2010). Measuring corporate social performance: A review . International Journal of Management Reviews , 12 (1), 50–84.
• World Commission on Environment and Development (Ed.). (1987). Our common future . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Related Articles

• Corporate Ethics
• Corporate Political Strategies
• Corporate Governance in Business and Management
• Social Movements and Their Impact on Business and Management

Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, Business and Management. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 11 September 2024

• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility
• [185.80.151.41]
• 185.80.151.41

Character limit 500 /500

How to Write Essays on The Ethics of Corporate Social Responsibility: 3 Best Examples

Engaging with the intricacies of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) can be a daunting task, yet it remains an essential topic in modern business ethics. In a world where companies operate under the watchful eye of the public, understanding the ethical implications of their actions becomes crucial. This guide breaks down the art of crafting an effective essay on the ethics of corporate social responsibility, providing you with top examples and practical advice to get you started. Ready to dive into the topic? Let’s get started!

• What is Corporate Social Responsibility?

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is a business model that integrates self-regulation into a company's practices to ensure its adherence to law, ethical standards, and international norms. Essentially, CSR means that companies are socially accountable—to themselves, their stakeholders, and the public. This accountability goes beyond the pursuit of profits and includes a commitment to contribute to the well-being of society and the environment.

Components of CSR

• Environmental Responsibility : Emphasizes sustainable resource use and reduced carbon footprints.
• Ethical Responsibility : Encompasses fair treatment of employees, customers, and vendors.
• Philanthropic Responsibility : Focuses on acts of charity, community engagement, and social welfare improvements.
• Economic Responsibility : Highlights producing profit within the framework of legal and ethical boundaries.
• Why Ethics Matter in CSR

Ethics play a pivotal role in CSR by ensuring that businesses go beyond mere legal compliance to act in socially responsible ways. Here’s why ethics matter:

• Builds Trust : Ethical practices foster trust among stakeholders and the public.
• Enhances Reputation : Companies perceived as ethical are more likely to attract top talent and loyal customers.
• Mitigates Risk : Adhering to ethical standards reduces the risk of legal challenges and public scandals.
• Encourages Long-Term Profitability : Ethical behavior ensures sustainable business operations, securing long-term profitability and success.
• Writing Tips for an Essay on The Ethics of Corporate Social Responsibility

Writing an essay on this topic involves a careful balance of theoretical concepts with practical examples. Here are some tips to get you started:

• Conduct Thorough Research : Understand various CSR frameworks and ethical theories relevant to your essay.
• Develop a Clear Thesis : Your thesis should summarize your main argument about the role of ethics in corporate social responsibility.
• Use Real-World Examples : Provide examples of companies that have successfully integrated ethical practices into their CSR strategies and those that have failed.
• Critically Analyze : Assess not only the positive aspects but also the challenges and controversies surrounding CSR and ethics.
• Structured Approach : Break down your essay into an introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion. Each section should flow logically from one to the next.
• Engage the Reader : Use a compelling introduction and thoughtful conclusions to engage the reader and leave a lasting impression.
• What is a Good CSR Essay?

A good CSR essay is one that successfully demonstrates an understanding of both CSR principles and ethical considerations. To do this, your essay should:

• Clearly Define CSR and its Ethical Foundations : Start with a comprehensive definition and the importance of ethics in CSR.
• Provide Balanced Views : Offer balanced perspectives, citing both the benefits and pitfalls of ethical CSR practices.
• Include Case Studies : Use real-world examples to back up your arguments, discussing what worked and what didn’t.
• End with Thoughtful Reflections : Reflect on the future of CSR and ethics, highlighting potential trends or ongoing challenges.
• What is a Bad CSR Essay?

Conversely, an ineffective CSR essay might exhibit these traits:

• Lacks Clear Definitions : Fails to define key concepts, leaving the reader confused about what CSR actually entails.
• Overly Biased : Presents a one-sided perspective without acknowledging counterarguments or complexities in CSR ethics.
• Poorly Researched : Lacks credible sources or relies on outdated information, weakening the essay's credibility.
• Unstructured Format : Wanders off-topic or lacks a coherent structure, making it difficult to follow the essay's argument.
• 3 Typical Essay Examples

Example 1: The Ethical Dilemma of Profit vs. Responsibility

Introduction : Introduce the ongoing debate between prioritizing profits and maintaining ethical responsibility.

Body Paragraphs :

• Historical Context : Discuss the evolution of CSR and the shift towards ethical responsibility.
• Theoretical Framework : Apply ethical theories (e.g., Utilitarianism, Deontology) to CSR practices.
• Case Study : Analyze a company that faced an ethical dilemma between profit and responsibility, such as ExxonMobil’s environmental issues versus its financial success.

Conclusion : Reflect on the need for a balanced approach to reconcile profitability with ethical obligations.

Example 2: CSR in the Tech Industry

Introduction : Set the stage by discussing the immense influence of the tech industry and the ethical challenges it faces.

• Scope of Influence : Delve into how tech giants like Google and Facebook impact society.
• Ethical Issues : Address specific challenges such as data privacy, misinformation, and labor practices.
• Case Study : Explore Google’s ethical controversies and its efforts to incorporate CSR into its business model.

Conclusion : Summarize the importance of ethical considerations in the tech industry and suggest possible improvements.

Example 3: Environmental Responsibility and Ethical Practices

Introduction : Present environmental conservation as a cornerstone of CSR, emphasizing the urgency of ethical environmental practices.

• Environmental Ethics : Explain the ethical theories relevant to environmental conservation and how they apply to businesses.
• Corporate Initiatives : Highlight companies like Patagonia which have successfully integrated environmental CSR into their business strategy.
• Challenges : Discuss ongoing challenges and criticisms faced by companies striving for genuine environmental responsibility.

Conclusion : Reflect on the growing importance of ethical environmental practices in sustainable business operations.

Writing an impactful essay on the ethics of corporate social responsibility requires a solid understanding of both CSR principles and ethical theories. By clarifying key concepts, critically analyzing real-world examples, and presenting balanced views, you can craft a compelling essay that not only informs but also engages your readers. Whether you’re exploring the ethical dilemmas in profit-making, the unique challenges in the tech industry, or the urgency of environmental responsibility, your essay should resonate with clarity, depth, and thoughtful reflection. Happy writing!

How to Write Essays on The Ethics of Artificial Intelligence: 3 Best Examples

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is often viewed as the technological boon of our generation, but with it comes complex ethical dilemmas that spark heated debates. If your next assignment involves writing an essay about the ethics of AI, you’re in for an engaging challenge. This article will delve into essential tips and offer three examples to help you craft your own compelling essay on the topic.

How to Write Essays on the Role of Education in Promoting Social Justice: 3 Best Examples

Education is often considered the great equalizer, a bridge that can help societies move toward greater fairness and equity. Writing an essay on the role of education in promoting social justice can be incredibly engaging as you delve into the transformative power of knowledge and teaching. In this guide, we will explore tips on how to write compelling essays on this topic and provide three impactful essay examples.

30 ‘In Conclusion’ Synonyms and How To Use Them Write Better Essays

A strong closing section is essential for any essay. Whether you’re writing an argumentative essay, an exposition, or a narrative essay, the conclusion needs to be one of the most impactful parts of your writing. If you’re looking at ‘in conclusion’ synonyms, then you likely need some help with crafting an impactful summary section.

Presentations made painless

• Get Premium

118 Social Responsibility Essay Topic Ideas & Examples

Inside This Article

Social responsibility is a crucial aspect of our society that involves individuals and organizations taking actions that benefit society at large. It involves being conscious of the impact of one's actions on the environment, society, and the economy. Writing an essay on social responsibility can help raise awareness about important issues and inspire others to take action. To help you get started, here are 118 social responsibility essay topic ideas and examples:

• The importance of corporate social responsibility in today's business world
• How companies can promote social responsibility through sustainable practices
• The impact of social responsibility on consumer behavior
• The role of government in promoting social responsibility
• The ethical implications of social responsibility
• The benefits of social responsibility for businesses and society
• The relationship between social responsibility and environmental sustainability
• How social responsibility can help address social inequality
• The role of social responsibility in promoting diversity and inclusion
• The impact of social responsibility on employee morale and productivity
• How social responsibility can help businesses build trust with consumers
• The challenges of implementing social responsibility initiatives
• The role of social responsibility in shaping public policy
• The impact of social responsibility on brand reputation
• The role of social responsibility in disaster relief efforts
• The benefits of social responsibility for small businesses
• The role of social responsibility in promoting ethical leadership
• The impact of social responsibility on employee retention
• The relationship between social responsibility and corporate governance
• The role of social responsibility in promoting economic development
• The challenges of measuring the impact of social responsibility initiatives
• The role of social responsibility in addressing climate change
• The impact of social responsibility on shareholder value
• The benefits of social responsibility for nonprofit organizations
• The relationship between social responsibility and social entrepreneurship
• The role of social responsibility in promoting community development
• The impact of social responsibility on organizational culture
• The challenges of balancing social responsibility with profitability
• The role of social responsibility in promoting ethical supply chain practices
• The benefits of social responsibility for employees and their families
• The relationship between social responsibility and government regulation
• The impact of social responsibility on employee engagement
• The role of social responsibility in promoting social justice
• The challenges of integrating social responsibility into business operations
• The benefits of social responsibility for investors and shareholders
• The relationship between social responsibility and corporate social responsibility reporting
• The impact of social responsibility on brand loyalty
• The role of social responsibility in promoting employee wellness programs
• The benefits of social responsibility for local communities
• The relationship between social responsibility and social media
• The impact of social responsibility on organizational performance
• The role of social responsibility in promoting ethical marketing practices
• The challenges of implementing social responsibility initiatives in developing countries
• The relationship between social responsibility and business ethics
• The impact of social responsibility on employee satisfaction
• The role of social responsibility in promoting sustainable development
• The benefits of social responsibility for customers and consumers
• The relationship between social responsibility and corporate philanthropy
• The impact of social responsibility on organizational reputation
• The role of social responsibility in promoting environmental conservation

These social responsibility essay topic ideas and examples can help you brainstorm ideas for your essay and explore different aspects of social responsibility. Whether you are writing about the role of businesses in promoting social responsibility or the impact of social responsibility on society, there are plenty of interesting topics to choose from. Remember to conduct thorough research and provide examples to support your arguments. By writing about social responsibility, you can raise awareness about important issues and inspire others to take action for the betterment of society.

Want to research companies faster?

Instantly access industry insights

Let PitchGrade do this for me

Leverage powerful AI research capabilities

We will create your text and designs for you. Sit back and relax while we do the work.

Explore More Content

• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Service

© 2024 Pitchgrade

• Search Search Please fill out this field.

What Is CSR?

• Understanding CSR

Types of CSR

Company examples, the bottom line.

• Sustainable Investing
• Socially Responsible Investing

What Is CSR? Corporate Social Responsibility Explained

Katrina Ávila Munichiello is an experienced editor, writer, fact-checker, and proofreader with more than fourteen years of experience working with print and online publications.

• Guide to Socially Responsible Investments (SRI)
• Why Social Responsibility Matters to Business
• Investing in Unethical Stocks: The Pros and Cons for Trader
• Socially Responsible Investing vs. Sin Stocks
• Racial Justice Investing
• Top 5 Impact Investing Firms
• Socially Responsible Mutual Funds
• The Rise of the Socially Responsible ETF
• Demand for ESG Investments Soars Emerging From COVID-19 Pandemic
• A Guide to Faith-Based Investing
• Socially Responsible Investment for Gender Empowerment
• History of Impact Investing
• Impact Investing vs. Venture Philanthropy
• How ESG, SRI, and Impact Funds Differ
• Ethical Investing
• Social Responsibility
• Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) CURRENT ARTICLE
• Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Criteria
• Conscious Capitalism
• Social Impact Statement
• Social Impact Bond (SIB)
• Impact Investing

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a self-regulating business model that helps a company be socially accountable to itself, its stakeholders, and the public. 

By practicing corporate social responsibility, also called corporate citizenship , companies are aware of how they impact aspects of society, including economic, social, and environmental. Engaging in CSR means a company operates in ways that enhance society and the environment instead of contributing negatively to them.

Key Takeaways

• Corporate social responsibility is a business model by which companies make a concerted effort to operate in ways that enhance rather than degrade society and the environment.
• CSR can help improve society and promote a positive brand image for companies.
• CSR includes four categories: environmental impacts, ethical responsibility, philanthropic endeavors, and financial responsibilities.

Investopedia / Zoe Hansen

Understanding Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)

Through corporate social responsibility programs , philanthropy, and volunteer efforts, businesses can benefit society while boosting their brands. A socially responsible company is accountable to itself and its shareholders. CSR is commonly a strategy employed by large corporations. The more visible and successful a corporation is, the more responsibility it has to set standards of ethical behavior for its peers, competition, and industry .

Small and midsize businesses also create social responsibility programs, although their initiatives are rarely as well-publicized as those of larger corporations.

• Environmental responsibility: Corporate social responsibility is rooted in preserving the environment. A company can pursue environmental stewardship by reducing pollution and emissions in manufacturing, recycling materials, replenishing natural resources like trees, or creating product lines consistent with CSR.
• Ethical responsibility: Corporate social responsibility includes acting fairly and ethically. Instances of ethical responsibility include fair treatment of all customers regardless of age, race, culture, or sexual orientation, favorable pay and benefits for employees, vendor use across demographics, full disclosures, and transparency for investors.
• Philanthropic responsibility: CSR requires a company to contribute to society, whether a company donates profit to charities, enters into transactions only with suppliers or vendors that align with the company philanthropically, supports employee philanthropic endeavors, or sponsors fundraising events.
• Financial responsibility: A company might make plans to be more environmentally, ethically, and philanthropically focused, however, it must back these plans through financial investments in programs, donations, or product research including research and development for products that encourage sustainability, creating a diverse workforce, or implementing DEI, social awareness, or environmental initiatives.

Volunteering

Some corporate social responsibility models replace financial responsibility with a sense of volunteerism. Otherwise, most models still include environmental, ethical, and philanthropic as types of CSR.

Benefits of CSR

According to a study published in the Journal of Consumer Psychology, consumers are more likely to act favorably toward a company that has acted to benefit its customers. As a company engages in CSR, it is more likely to receive favorable brand recognition . Additionally, workers are more likely to stay with a company they believe in. This reduces employee turnover, disgruntled workers, and the total cost of a new employee .

For companies looking to outperform the market, enacting CSR strategies may improve how investors view the company's value. The Boston Consulting Group found that companies considered leaders in environmental, social, or governance matters had an 11% valuation premium over their competitors.

CSR practices help companies mitigate risk by avoiding troubling situations. This includes preventing adverse activities such as discrimination against employee groups, disregard for natural resources, unethical use of company funds, and activity that leads to lawsuits, and litigation .

CSR programs can raise morale in the workplace.  

In its 2022 Environmental and Social Impact Report, Starbucks ( SBUX ) highlights taking care of its workforce and the planet among its CSR priorities through stock grants and additional medical, family, and educational benefits. The company's goals include achieving 50% reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, water consumption, and waste by 2030.

Home Depot ( HD ) has invested more than 1 million hours per year in training to help front-line employees advance in their careers, aims to produce or procure 100% renewable energy to operate its facilities by 2030, and has plans to spend $5 billion per year with diverse suppliers by 2025.

General Motors won the Sustainability Leadership Award from the Business Intelligence Group in 2022. The automaker provided $60 million in grants to more than 400 U.S. nonprofits focusing on social issues, and it has agreements in place to use 100% renewable electricity at its U.S. sites by 2025.

Why Should a Company Implement CSR Strategies?

Many companies view CSR as an integral part of their brand image, believing customers will be more likely to do business with brands they perceive to be more ethical. In this sense, CSR activities can be an important component of corporate public relations. At the same time, some company founders are also motivated to engage in CSR due to their convictions.

What Is ISO 26000?

In 2010, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) released ISO 26000, a set of voluntary standards to help companies implement corporate social responsibility. Unlike other ISO standards, ISO 26000 provides guidance rather than requirements because the nature of CSR is more qualitative than quantitative, and its standards cannot be certified. ISO 26000 clarifies social responsibility and helps organizations translate CSR principles into practical actions.

What Are the Benefits of CSR?

CSR initiatives strive to have a positive impact on the world through direct benefits to society, nature and the community in which a business operations. In addition, a company may experience internal benefits through the initiatives. Knowing their company is promoting good causes, employee satisfaction may increase and retention of staff may be strengthened. In addition, members of society may be more likely to choose to transact with companies that are attempting to make a more conscious positive impact beyond the scope of its business.

What Companies Have the Best CSR?

Since 1999, Corporate Responsibility Magazine has ranked the top 100 Best Corporate Citizens each year among the 1,000 largest U.S. public companies. Rankings are based on employee relations, environmental impact, human rights, governance, and financial decisions. In 2023, the top-ranked companies include Hewlett-Packard Enterprise Company, Accenture, and Hasbro.

Companies striving to measure success beyond bottom-line financial results may adopt CSR strategies that target environmental, ethical, philanthropic, and fiscal responsibility that extend beyond the products they sell.

Society for Consumer Psychology. " Good Guys Can Finish First: How Brand Reputation Affects Extension Evaluations ."

Boston Consulting Group. " Your Supply Chain Needs a Sustainability Strategy ."

Frontiers in Psychology. " Corporate Social Responsibility and Employee Engagement: Enabling Employees to Employ More of Their Whole Selves at Work ."

Starbucks. " 2022 Starbucks Global Environmental and Social Impact Report ," Pages 6 and 32.

Home Depot. " ESG Report (2022) ," Pages 9-10.

General Motors. " 2022 Sustainability Report ," Pages 6-7.

International Organization for Standardization. " ISO 26000, Social Responsibility ."

3BL Media. " 100 Best Corporate Citizens of 2023 ."

• Terms of Service
• Editorial Policy
• Privacy Policy

• Business Essentials
• Leadership & Management
• Credential of Leadership, Impact, and Management in Business (CLIMB)
• Entrepreneurship & Innovation
• Digital Transformation
• Finance & Accounting
• Business in Society
• For Organizations
• Support Portal
• Media Coverage
• Founding Donors
• Leadership Team

• Harvard Business School →
• HBS Online →
• Business Insights →

Business Insights

Harvard Business School Online's Business Insights Blog provides the career insights you need to achieve your goals and gain confidence in your business skills.

• Career Development
• Communication
• Decision-Making
• Earning Your MBA
• Negotiation
• News & Events
• Productivity
• Staff Spotlight
• Student Profiles
• Work-Life Balance
• AI Essentials for Business
• Alternative Investments
• Business Analytics
• Business Strategy
• Business and Climate Change
• Creating Brand Value
• Design Thinking and Innovation
• Digital Marketing Strategy
• Disruptive Strategy
• Economics for Managers
• Entrepreneurship Essentials
• Financial Accounting
• Global Business
• Launching Tech Ventures
• Leadership Principles
• Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability
• Leading Change and Organizational Renewal
• Leading with Finance
• Management Essentials
• Negotiation Mastery
• Organizational Leadership
• Power and Influence for Positive Impact
• Strategy Execution
• Sustainable Business Strategy
• Sustainable Investing
• Winning with Digital Platforms

What Is Corporate Social Responsibility? 4 Types

• 08 Apr 2021

Until fairly recently, most large businesses were driven almost exclusively with a single goal in mind: maximizing profits.

In the past few decades, however, more business leaders have recognized that they have a responsibility to do more than simply maximize profits for shareholders and executives. Rather, they have a social responsibility to do what’s best—not just for their companies, but people, the planet, and society at large.

This realization has led to the emergence of companies identifying as socially responsible. Some even carry designations or seals, such as B Corporations (B Corps), social purpose corporations (SPCs), and low-profit limited liability companies (L3Cs).

But what is corporate social responsibility, and what are the different forms it can take?

Access your free e-book today.

What Is Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)?

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is the idea that a business has a responsibility to the society that exists around it, according to the online course Sustainable Business Strategy .

Firms that embrace CSR are typically organized in a manner that empowers them to act in a socially responsible way to positively impact the world. It’s a form of self-regulation that can be expressed in initiatives or strategies, depending on an organization’s goals. Many organizations communicate these efforts to external and internal stakeholders through corporate social responsibility reports .

There are various examples of what “socially responsible” means from organization to organization. Firms are often guided by a concept known as the triple bottom line , which dictates that a business should be committed to measuring its social and environmental impact, sustainability efforts, and profits. The adage “profit, people, planet,” known as the “three P’s,” is often used to summarize the driving force behind this concept.

Check out our video on corporate social responsibility below, and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more explainer content!

Types of Corporate Social Responsibility

CSR is traditionally broken into four categories: environmental, philanthropic, ethical, and economic responsibility.

1. Environmental Responsibility

Environmental responsibility is the belief that organizations should behave in as environmentally friendly a way as possible. It’s one of the most common forms of CSR. Some companies use the term “environmental stewardship” to refer to such initiatives.

Companies that seek to embrace environmental responsibility can do so in several ways:

• Reducing harmful practices: Decreasing pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, the use of single-use plastics, water consumption, and general waste
• Regulating energy consumption: Increasing reliance on renewables, sustainable resources, and recycled or partially recycled materials
• Offsetting negative environmental impact: Planting trees, funding research, and donating to related causes

2. Ethical Responsibility

Ethical responsibility is concerned with ensuring an organization is operating in a fair and ethical manner. Organizations that embrace ethical responsibility aim to practice ethical behavior through fair treatment of all stakeholders, including leadership, investors, employees, suppliers, and customers.

Firms can embrace ethical responsibility in different ways. For example, a business might set its own, higher minimum wage if the one mandated by the state or federal government doesn’t constitute a “livable wage.” Likewise, a business might require that products, ingredients, materials, or components be sourced according to free trade standards.

In this regard, many firms have processes to ensure they’re not purchasing products resulting from slavery or child labor.

3. Philanthropic Responsibility

Philanthropic responsibility refers to a business’s aim to actively make the world and society a better place.

In addition to acting ethically and environmentally friendly, organizations driven by philanthropic responsibility often dedicate a portion of their earnings. While many firms donate to charities and nonprofits that align with their missions, others donate to worthy causes that don’t directly relate to their business. Others go so far as to create their own charitable trust or organization to give back and have a positive impact on society.

4. Economic Responsibility

Economic responsibility is the practice of a firm backing all of its financial decisions in its commitment to do good. The end goal isn’t just to maximize profits, but also to make sure the business operations positively impact the environment, people, and society.

What Are the Benefits of Corporate Social Responsibility?

Most firms embrace CSR due to moral convictions, which can result in several benefits and important social change .

CSR initiatives can, for example, be a powerful marketing tool, helping a company position itself favorably in the eyes of consumers, investors, and regulators. These initiatives can also improve employee engagement and satisfaction—key measures that drive retention. They can even attract potential employees who carry strong personal convictions that match those of the organization.

Finally, CSR initiatives inherently force business leaders to examine hiring and management practices, where and how they source products or components, and the steps they take to deliver value to customers.

This reflection can often lead to innovative and groundbreaking solutions that help a company act in a more socially responsible way and increase profits. For example, reconceptualizing the manufacturing process so that a company consumes less energy and produces less waste allows it to become more environmentally friendly while reducing its energy and materials costs— value that can be reclaimed and shared with both suppliers and customers.

Are you interested in learning how to lead your organization toward positive change? Explore Sustainable Business Strategy —one of our online courses related to business in society —and discover how you can become a purpose-driven leader. Not sure which course is the right fit? Download our free course flowchart to determine which best aligns with your goals.

This post was updated on August 8, 2023. It was originally published on April 8, 2021.

About the Author

Corporate Social Responsibility Essays

Corporate social responsibility, corporate culture diversity-nike, employer branding at royal bank of canada’s (rbc), critical evaluation of the evolution of 2 traditional leadership theories and 2 traditional management theories to a 2023/2024 context, the role of a corporation: understanding corporate social responsibility, the moral imperative of corporate social responsibility, the pros and cons of shell’s involvement in nigeria, maximizing profits at the expense of social responsibility in business, the evolution of corporate social responsibility, expanding nova energy drink into south america, analysis of the corporate operations, culture, and social responsibility practices at apple inc., the dynamic interplay of transnational corporations and the state in shaping the global economy, analysis of amazon’s ethical issue of disregard for workers’ rights, maple leaf food inc., coca-cola risk governance and corporate social responsibility, popular essay topics.

• American Dream
• Artificial Intelligence
• Black Lives Matter
• Bullying Essay
• Career Goals Essay
• Causes of the Civil War
• Child Abusing
• Civil Rights Movement
• Community Service
• Cultural Identity
• Cyber Bullying
• Death Penalty
• Depression Essay
• Domestic Violence
• Freedom of Speech
• Global Warming
• Gun Control
• Human Trafficking
• I Believe Essay
• Immigration
• Importance of Education
• Israel and Palestine Conflict
• Leadership Essay
• Legalizing Marijuanas
• Mental Health
• National Honor Society
• Police Brutality
• Pollution Essay
• Racism Essay
• Romeo and Juliet
• Same Sex Marriages
• Social Media
• The Great Gatsby
• The Yellow Wallpaper
• Time Management
• To Kill a Mockingbird
• Violent Video Games
• What Makes You Unique
• Why I Want to Be a Nurse
• Send us an e-mail

Published: 22 December 2023 Contributors: Amanda McGrath, Alexandra Jonker

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is the idea that businesses should operate according to principles and policies that make a positive impact on society and the environment.

Through CSR, companies make decisions driven by financial gain and profitability, and the impact of their actions on their communities and the world at large. CSR goes beyond legal obligations: by voluntarily adopting ethical, sustainable and responsible business practices, companies seek to deliver benefits to consumers, shareholders, employees and society.

Learn about the processes used to manage environmental performance data and the steps required to account for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

Register for the playbook on smarter asset management

Often, a company’s business model and practices are built around financial goals. However, CSR programs encourage business leaders to consider corporate citizenship or the larger impact of the business on society when making decisions. Corporate social responsibility helps companies ensure that their operations are ethical, safe and delivering positive impact wherever possible. Through CSR initiatives, companies work to limit environmental impact, contribute to solving societal problems (such as poverty and inequality) and ensure their brand identity reflects their values.

The theory of the “ triple bottom line ” can help organizations as they pursue corporate social responsibility. As a financial framework, the triple bottom line refers to the idea that a company’s business model should revolve around the three P’s: people, planet and profit. By maximizing all three, a company aims to make a positive impact on the world and remove barriers to growth.

Corporate social responsibility initiatives generally fall into four categories: environmental, ethical, philanthropic and economic. Each type of CSR contributes to a company’s overall CSR strategy.

More companies are assessing their overall environmental impact and engaging in CSR efforts that aim to protect natural resources and minimize any contribution to climate change. CSR encourages sustainability in business through eco-friendly practices, such as by reducing energy consumption, using renewable resources and minimizing waste.

Environmental responsibility hinges on eliminating negative impacts of business operations (primarily through limiting pollution-causing activities) as well as offsetting them through actions such as planting trees and engaging in programs that support biodiversity.

CSR initiatives often focus on social impact and human rights concerns, such as ensuring fair wages, safe working conditions and proper treatment of employees and suppliers. They also encourage accountability both internally and externally. Ethical CSR may include abiding by fair labor practices, ending workplace discrimination and ensuring supply chain transparency.

CSR practices include donating money, resources or time to positive causes and organizations, such as local and national charities, educational programs, disaster relief and more. Businesses who adopt philanthropic CSR engage with the communities where they operate, offering support through volunteer work, sponsoring local events, making contributions to local nonprofits or supporting skills training programs.

Corporate social responsibility involves ensuring that money is not a company’s sole motivator. To demonstrate this, companies enact policies and procedures to make sure their choices align with values, even if the alternatives may save money or boost profitability. Economic CSR also includes efforts to support the economic development and growth of the communities in which a business operates—for example, supporting job training and job creation efforts and forging local partnerships.

The benefits of CSR include:

CSR can have a positive impact on an organization’s brand identity as well as its bottom line. Some CSR efforts, such as improving energy efficiency, can reduce operating costs and might lead to savings in the end. Consumers increasingly prefer brands that share their values, and CSR policies offer ways for organizations to demonstrate those values, building trust and loyalty to fuel a competitive advantage.

CSR can also help attract top talent and drive employee engagement and retention, as more workers seek employers whose values align with their own. Additionally, a proactive approach to ethical and social issues has the potential to prevent legal problems, fines and reputational damage.

CSR initiatives can help people become more responsible consumers, making it easier for them to access products and services that align with their values and educating them on issues of sustainability and ethical consumption. It can encourage companies to prioritize and invest in testing, quality control and safety measures. CSR can also minimize the likelihood of defective or harmful products reaching consumers.

CSR can have a positive impact on the overall health of the planet, as it encourages environmental responsibility and sustainable practices. CSR initiatives can help companies reduce their greenhouse gas emissions or pursue net-zero emissions goals that are key to slowing climate change. They might also help conserve natural resources, reduce pollution and limit disruption of ecosystems. Additionally, a focus on CSR can support investment in research and development of eco-friendly products and practices.

Corporate social responsibility can help support local communities and address societal issues, such as poverty, inequality and environmental concerns. CSR initiatives can fuel economic growth by creating jobs. They can also shape public opinion as companies leading the way inspire others to follow suit, creating a positive ripple effect. A focus on ethical behavior at the corporate level reinforces a broader norm of ethical behavior across other parts of society.

Consumers are increasingly seeking products and services from socially responsible companies. Meanwhile, many investors are prioritizing companies whose values are clear and aligned with their own. To meet these demands, businesses are integrating CSR into their operations. In addition, global expansion and the increasingly interconnected nature of supply chains pushes companies to comply with a growing web of regulatory environments and to better confront the impact of their business on communities around the world.

With increased awareness of environmental issues, labor practices and ethical concerns, combined with better research and communication, CSR is now more central to business strategies. Some companies even have dedicated CSR departments.

Examples of CSR include:

• Donating a percentage of profits to environmental or social causes
• Committing to using recycled and eco-friendly materials
• Sourcing fair-trade materials and ingredients
• Engaging in social activism or fundraising on behalf of social causes
• Using technology such as artificial intelligence (AI) to drive energy efficiency and reduce carbon footprints
• Creating programs for the ethical use and disposal of products, such as electronics recycling programs
• Instituting diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs that support efforts to diversify and grow the workforce in new ways
• Supporting programs that replenish the natural resources, such as water or timber, used for production
• Turning to renewable energy sources and other strategies that help in the pursuit of net-zero or carbon-neutral goals
• Establishing employee well-being programs that support their physical and mental health

Corporate social responsibility is the overall ethos that drives a company to adopt policies and practices that support sustainability, societal and other ethical ends. Environmental, social and governance (ESG) is about the ways in which their impact is measured or quantified. While both CSR and ESG are about reflecting the company’s values, CSR is typically seen as more of an internal framework, while ESG frameworks are often used externally as a way of demonstrating real-world impact.

Because the parameters of corporate social responsibility are continually evolving, there is no single standard by which CSR initiatives are measured or governed. Companies that embrace CSR are guided by local and international laws, including environmental regulations, labor rules and consumer protection standards.

Some efforts are also held to industry-specific standards; for example, the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) provides reporting standards for sustainability. Organizations like the United Nations have introduced global guidance, such as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which encourage businesses to adopt sustainable practices.

Many companies that embrace CSR will also engage in CSR reporting , through which they document performance of non-financial metrics and provide transparency on social and environmental impact. CSR reporting is typically voluntary; however, some jurisdictions mandate that large organizations disclose social and environmental performance, so that investors and consumers can assess CSR efforts.

Some organizations have designated corporate social responsibility teams that oversee a company's CSR activities. People on these teams plan and run the social and environmental programs that align with the company's values and goals. They work with company leadership to devise the overall CSR strategy and engage stakeholders, including employees, customers, investors and community partners, to help them succeed. They also typically track and report on their progress by using metrics and other methods of assessment, deal with compliance and regulatory issues and manage communication about the company’s CSR efforts both internally and externally.

Simplify the capture, consolidation, management, analysis and reporting of your environmental, social and governance (ESG) data.

CSR reporting is the practice of reporting an organization’s performance of non-financial metrics, providing transparency on the organization’s impact on society and the environment.

Net zero is the point at which greenhouse gases emitted into the atmosphere are balanced by an equivalent amount removed from the atmosphere.

The goal of the CRSD is to provide transparency that will help stakeholders better evaluate EU companies’ sustainability performance as well as the related business impacts and risks.

The triple bottom line (TBL) is a sustainability framework that revolves around the three P’s: people, planet and profit.

Sustainability in business refers to a company's strategy and actions to eliminate the adverse environmental and social impacts caused by business operations.

Decarbonization is a method of climate change mitigation that reduces greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, as well as removes them from the atmosphere.

Simplify the capture, consolidation, management, analysis and reporting of your environmental, social and governance (ESG) data with IBM Envizi ESG Suite.

From there to here: 50 years of thinking on the social responsibility of business

It has now been 50 years since economist Milton Friedman asked and answered a fundamental question: What is the role of business in society?

Friedman’s stance was plain: “There is one and only one social responsibility of business—to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits.” That view has long influenced management thinking, corporate governance, and strategic moves. But more recently, many leaders have sought to expand that definition to consider all the stakeholders who stand to gain—or lose—from organizations’ decisions.

In 2019, Business Roundtable released a new “Statement on the purpose of a corporation,” signed by 181 CEOs who committed to lead their companies for the benefit of all stakeholders—customers, employees, suppliers, communities, and shareholders. The statement outlined a modern standard for corporate responsibility.

On the 50th anniversary of Friedman’s landmark definition, we look at how the conversation on corporate purpose  has evolved.

The pre-1970 conversation

Even before Friedman’s essay published, the social responsibility of business was a topic of discussion. McKinsey, for example, was part of the early conversation about corporate purpose, which centered on the idea of improving performance and a belief that healthier corporations meant a healthier society. The firm’s earliest formal expression of its objectives spoke of the value of “advancing the profitableness and welfare of American business and hence the welfare of the country as a whole” (1937).

The discussion of corporations’ role in society continued to unfold in the 1950s and 1960s, when Columbia University and McKinsey presented a lecture series in which executives discussed the challenges of large organizations. Many of those talks became books that addressed the issues Friedman would soon take on.

Friedman’s seminal 1970 essay

On September 13, 1970, when Friedman published his landmark piece, “The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits,” in the New York Times , he wrote:

In a free-enterprise, private-property system, a corporate executive is an employee of the owners of the business. He has direct responsibility to his employers. That responsibility is to conduct the business in accordance with their desires, which generally will be to make as much money as possible while conforming to their basic rules of the society, both those embodied in law and those embodied in ethical custom.

Like many businesses and thinkers, McKinsey has grappled with such ideas over the years. A 1971 statement of the firm’s goals highlights the role of profitability but acknowledges that it isn’t the sole social responsibility of business; consultants can also “do worthwhile things for society as well as to earn substantial financial rewards.”

Marvin Bower—McKinsey’s managing director from 1950 to 1967, who remained a vocal leader even after stepping down—also continued to emphasize the importance of enduring business values, which could be translated into societal as well as business impact:

Outside the service for which we are compensated, each of us has an opportunity, through the firm, to serve the society of which [we are] a part. Our knowledge of the problem-solving process enables us to contribute disproportionately to the welfare of our communities.

The 1980s and 1990s: An expanded global view

Management attention started to go global in the 1980s. The business world examined how Japanese companies in particular were revolutionizing manufacturing to compete against once-dominant Western players. Political and social changes were also afoot, and the shift toward globalization took hold.

McKinsey managing director Fred Gluck (1988–94) called on the firm to raise its sights and expand its horizons:

Beginning with a memo not two weeks before the Berlin Wall came down, he urged his partners to expand their vision beyond their usual business clients. As the world’s best problem solvers, he argued, McKinsey should aspire to advise national and world leaders on global issues like poverty, European integration, and the environment. It should help design and implement the reforms that were certain to follow in the wake of the revolutions unfolding in Eastern Europe, the Soviet Union, and Asia. Though not universally shared, Gluck’s call to action struck a chord with many firm leaders. … They were being challenged to help change the world.

The McKinsey Global Institute was founded in this era, looking to generate fresh insights through serious research that integrated the disciplines of economics and management. And although work continued to prize financial impact for clients, the thinking around future impact continued to expand.

The 2000s and 2010s: A focus on longer-term, inclusive growth

Technological advances may have facilitated globalization, but the dot-com crash of the early 2000s and ensuing changes—to say nothing of the global financial crisis of 2008—brought discussion on the social responsibility of business into the zeitgeist.

In a 2006 interview, McKinsey’s former London office manager Peter Foy reflected:

I have real misgivings about the way that [business] changed. Because the minute the world … changed from building great companies and keeping shareholders happy to serving shareholders on a quarterly delivery, wealth-creation basis … you changed everything in the business system. The motivation of the CEO, and the organization, and the time you spend on it all.

The conversations also entered the realm of public ideas. One particularly powerful statement in the March 2011 Harvard Business Review article “ Capitalism for the long term ,” penned by McKinsey managing partner Dominic Barton, called for business-led reform to go beyond quarterly capitalism:

This shift is not just about persistently thinking and acting with a next-generation view—although that’s a key part of it. It’s about rewiring the fundamental ways we govern, manage, and lead corporations. It’s also about changing how we view business’s value and its role in society.

Barton later helped found the not-for-profit Focusing Capital on the Long Term, which encourages long-term investing and business decision making.

Additionally, the McKinsey Quarterly marked its 50-year anniversary  with a special edition on the future of management. One key theme: Corporate longevity and a long-term view of performance.

2019, the Business Roundtable statement, and what lies ahead

On August 19, 2019, the Business Roundtable issued its latest statement on the purpose of a corporation :

Businesses play a vital role in the economy by creating jobs, fostering innovation and providing essential goods and services. Businesses make and sell consumer products; manufacture equipment and vehicles; support the national defense; grow and produce food; provide health care; generate and deliver energy; and offer financial, communications and other services that underpin economic growth. While each of our individual companies serves its own corporate purpose, we share a fundamental commitment to all of our stakeholders.

The statement was endorsed by 181 CEOs (along with McKinsey global managing partner Kevin Sneader ), each committing to leading their companies for the benefit of all stakeholders—customers, employees, suppliers, communities, and shareholders.

Echoes of that statement continue to resonate today, even as leaders navigate crises and contemplate the next normal beyond coronavirus . As Marc Goedhart and Tim Koller note in “ The value of value creation ”: “Long-term value creation can—and should—take into account the interests of all stakeholders.” And Sneader and his coauthors underscore it as a top-management ethos in a new article on the CEO moment :

[The] COVID-19 pandemic has laid bare the profound interconnectedness between businesses and the broader world in which they operate. … Employees, customers, and stakeholders expect a CEO to articulate where the company stands on critical issues.

What lies ahead on this topic? Write to us .

This article was conceptualized, illustrated, and edited by McKinsey Global Publishing colleagues Mike Borruso , Torea Frey , Gwyn Herbein ,  Philip Mathew , Janet Michaud , and Nathan Wilson , with Paul Lasewicz , our archivist, guiding us on this walk through history.

Explore a career with us

Related articles.

Corporate Purpose

Purpose: Shifting from why to how

The value of value creation

Corporate Social Responsibility Term Paper

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

Ethics as an integral part of strategy, csr as a strategy in organizations.

Organizations are established with an ultimate objective of providing goods and Services to people. These organizations can operate locally or internationally. Those that operate in other countries in addition to their country of origin are termed as multinational corporations. There are those organizations that are solely after making profit while others are non profit organizations.

Whether the organizations are after making profit or not, they should operate in a manner that will not compromise with quality expectations of the clients. This is especially true given that organizations operate in an environment that is dynamic. The environment in which the organizations operate include political, social and economical environment.

Such environments call for the organizations to observe ethics and corporate social responsibility as a strategy for them to survive. This is due to the fact that corporations require good will from the communities in which they operate and they are governed by laws of the land.

Therefore this essay is going to focus on how ethics and corporate social responsibility (CSR) should be an integrated part of an organization’s strategy. This shall be discussed in relation to theories and using real life examples to support the arguments in the essay.

Ethics, as an integral part of an organization, is a strategy that can be approached from various theoretical perspectives. Therefore, an ethical organization should be built on the following three fundamental pillars: workers that observe ethics in the cause of their duties, leadership that is keen on ethics as it pertains to the workers and clients and the organizational structures and systems that are ethically sound.

Without these ethical pillars the organization will encounter challenges in the environment it operates (Jackson 2004). The organization cannot operate in a vacuum. This is because the management leaders of the organization must make decisions that are legal and customer friendly.

To achieve this different ethical approaches or theories are to be taken into considerations. They include moral rights approach, justice approach, utilitarian approach and individualism theory (George 1999).

To begin with, moral rights approach as an integral ethical strategy of an organization asserts that human beings have certain rights and freedoms that cannot be infringed by the decision made by individuals. For the decision to be considered ethical, it has to ensure that individual rights and liberties are not taken away from them.

The decision made by the leadership of the organization regarding its workers should be consistent with the following rights, “right of safety, moral right of free consent, the right of due process, the moral right of life and the moral right of freedom of speech (Behrman 1988).

An example that shows how companies violate human rights can be seen by how the Wal-Mart was found to violate its U.S workers rights in 2007 by preventing them from forming trade unions and instilling fear into them.

The leadership of the organization should ensure that its workers or any other stakeholders to the organization such as suppliers, creditors and the clients should have a free consent in decision matters that affect them. Free consent as a moral right encourages the leaders to allow the people to make decision that are knowingly and freely (Fisher & Lovell 2003).

On the other hand the leadership of the organization consider legal due process in their decision making process. This moral right calls for fair and sound hearing for an individual. The manager in the organization should allow the workers to seek a due legal process whenever they feel that their rights have been denied (European Commission 2002).

Like wise if the organization carries out the activities that pollute the environment the people can sue the organization for its harmful activities to the people and the environment. The fear of being sued for such violations leads to most organizations to do what is required of them (DFID 2003).

For instance, the Los Angeles Car Wash Company was sued by its workers for underpaying them. The workers were kept on duty outside the working hours without being paid their overtime dues. The workers were paid up their dues and were not dismissed from duty due to strong laws that protect them.

Next for decision to be considered morally correct the decision of the leaders in organization should consider the right to life and safety of its workers. The managers in the organization cannot expose their workers to the activities that threaten their life and safety. The companies that manufacture products for public consumption like the motor companies must be liable for the safety of the products to the consumers.

It shall be good ethics for such products to undergo vigorous tests before being sold to the public for safety reasons. The companies can give warnings to customers if the products may jeopardize their safety.

For example the General Motors Company recently recalled more than 300,000 SUVs and trucks to correct turn signal problems even though there were no injuries that had been reported from the clients. The recalling was well intended to correct a mistake that had been noticed and was vital in order to forestall any legal suits that might have followed (Dellaportes, Gibson, Alagai 2005).

In addition to that, the executives of the organization need to protect the privacy of their workers. The managers need avoid sexual harassment against their workers. The company needs to uphold to its free consent all the time. The company should give the right information to its stake holders regarding its operation.

Giving fraudulent information is unethical and may cost a lot to the company in terms of legal cost. For instance, one particular company gave a prospectus bearing false information about the unbounded wealth of Nevada.

A particular share broker who took such information in good faith wanted to disregard the contract agreement after realizing that the information provided was not true. Thus it is important that companies give correct information to such situations (Hartman 2004).

Lastly the people working within the organization and other stake holders to the organization have the right to freedom of speech and information.The companies should make an effort of informing its consumers on the products offered through education.

The companies should provide truthful information to the customers and should be truthful in their dealings (Crane & Matten 2007). For Example, in 2003 the U.S food and drug administration (FDA) destroyed up to 90,000 units of Royal Tongan Limu Dietary supplements that were being false claimed to treat several diseases (Hartman 2004).

The company should make decision that allows the stake holders to the organization to express themselves. This should allow the voice of the workers to be heard in matters that affects them. The top leadership should not undermine the views of those under them.

If the leader goes to the extent of embracing totalitarian kind of leadership in the organization there would be conflicts in organization which may lead to the eventual collapse of the organization. This is due to the fact that there will be a disconnection between the top management and the workers (Castka, Bamber, Bamber & Sharp 2004).

The second theoretical approach in the ethical strategy of an organization is the utilitarian approach. This theory upholds that when the managers make the decision, it should be morally good and its consequences should benefit a large number. Therefore this approach calls for a greater measure of benefits and harm or cost in terms of what is valued most by the decision makers in the organization.

For example if a company finds that using low-wage foreign workers will give it a competitive edge, it may just do that as a means of survival. However, this may not go down well with the locals who may feel that their jobs have been taken by foreigners (Jackson 2004). For Example, there were street protests in Ireland in response to increased number of companies using cheap labor provided by immigrants.

Another ethical approach as a strategy of an organization is that of individualism. This approach highlights that an individual’s interest to the organization should prevail for a long time. The managers should allow the stake holders of the company to make free choice as long as their interests do not conflict with those of the company.

For Example the Caribbean Money Market Brokers (CMMB) collapsed suddenly in February 2009, nothing was said about the imminent collapse and most of the stake holders were left in shock (Chrysside & Kaler 1996).

The justice approach as an ethical strategy by the organization is very important. This theory stipulates that moral decisions affecting the people in the company should be fair, equal and very impartial (Albertson 2007). For example it will be unfair for the unskilled laborer in the company to earn a higher salary than their skilled counterparts.

This kind of scenario is common in firms that employ relatives who often are not up to the task but they end up being paid more. The management of organizations should ensure that they pay workers depending on their output and level of skill.

On the other hand it will be unfair by the remuneration team in the organization to deny the workers compensation after they had been injured while on the job. This can exist where the legal process for such compensation is delayed by the management team who may not be willing to compensate their workers. That is not ethical in the life of the organization (Chrysside & Kaler 1996).

The rules and regulations of the organizations should be applied uniformly by the workers of the company. There should be no rules that discriminates the workers on the grounds regarding their health condition, race and gender. For Example, the Ghanaian government has formulated tough penalties to deal with Companies that are discriminating their workers on health Grounds. (Jackson 2004).

The corporate social responsibility as a strategy in the organization has been favored for a very long time as far as business is concerned. Competition from other organizations sends a company into looking for ways that can really put it above others. Corporate social responsibility seems to be the best avenue through which an organization can make itself appealing to its clients.

Organizations which get deeply involved in communal activities usually develop some bonding with the members of the society in which it operates. In the end it is always true that a company that will identify itself with the people will rip more from them. (Crane & Matten 2007).

How did this corporate social responsibility come about? It was partly brought about by the reshaping of the old-age traditional method of relationships in authority by ushering in new modern technology in creating of the wealth (Davis 2006). Thus the organization had to give back to the society in which it operates in which enables the organization to make large profit.

Therefore the organization gives its workers services such as free health services, promotion of education that were meant to appreciate the efforts of the workers to the organization. An organization that treats workers well will be better placed to maintain a skilled workforce and thus maintaining an overall good performance (Blowfield & Murray 2008).

Furthermore since the business or the organization acts as the moral agent of the society their social responsibility is to ensure that their social behavior does not compromise with the moral values of the society. Thus the decision making organ within the organization should ensure that they go beyond individual self interests to make decisions that will put the larger society in danger (Balabanis, Phillips & Lyall 1998).

The corporate social responsibility of the organization is well supported by the stake holder theory. This theory encourages the management team of the company to safeguard the interests of the legal fraternity subsystem, clients, creditors, and suppliers who are the stakeholders to the firm (Knight 1980).

The company has the corporate social responsibility of abiding to the government laws and regulations so as to avoid harming social good such as the citizens and the environment. However such government regulations interfere in the operation of the company.

For example, its failure to clean Hudson River led to legal suit against General Electric Company. This was as a result of failure to abide by the regulations. The company kept on arguing through legal structures for a long time while the river remained unclean (Blowfield & Murray 2008)

Another important theory that explains the role of corporate social responsibility of the organization is that of social demandingness. The theory stipulates that the managers of the organization should safeguard the interests of the stake holders in the society.

The executives of the corporations have to ensure that the social issues such as health care, safety and the prosperity is highly taken into consideration without disrupting the social harmony. A good example is Magellan Metal Company in West Australian that had to bear responsibility for the death of birds within the environs as a result of lead deposits.

The company showed a good example by closing down for a while to clean up. This was welcomed by the locals who were impressed by the move as a step in the right direction. (Balabanis, Phillips & Lyall 1998).

The corporate social responsibility embraces the legitimacy theory which states that organizations need to carry out activities that are proper. This indicates that the organization should not engage in the activities that are against the norms and values of the society (George 1999).

This theory calls upon the organization to carry out the activities that respect the moral values of the society in the society in which it operates. The company has to engage in the activities that should not impact negatively on the environment. The operations need be generally accepted.

For example, the toy making company had to adopt the risk management and quality control after it realized that its products contained lead poison. The millions toys were recalled by the company world wide. Such response was legitimate for the company and it saved the general public (Grace and Cohen 2006).

In conclusion it is imperative to note that an organization cannot operate in a vacuum. It operates in the society that is dynamic. For it to succeed, it has to lay down an appropriate strategy that is ethical and which incorporates corporate social responsibility. The organization that respects the moral rights of the people in the society shall be legitimate in its operations in the society.

Likewise, the organization which has a good corporate social responsibility will not fail to safeguard the interests of its stake holders. On that note, its public image shall be well defined by the people in the society in all spheres. Thus all companies that want to venture into any society around the globe should be aware of the social requirements of the given society.

They should also be willing to put up structures that will ensure that their operations do not compromise the environment. If all this are observed then the companies will exist harmoniously with the society and will also prevent legal hurdles that are associated with breaking the rules.

Albertson, T., 2007. The Gods of Business: The intersection of Faith and the Market Place . LA: Trinity Alumni Press.

Balabanis, G., Phillips, C. and Lyall. J., 1998. Corporate Social Responsibility and Economic Performance in the Top British Companies: Are They Linked? European Business Review , 98 (1), pp. 25-44.

Behrman, J.N., 1988. Essays on Ethics in Business and the Professions . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Blowfield, M. & Murray, A., 2008. Corporate Responsibility: A Critical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Castka, P., Bamber, C.J., Bamber D.J. and Sharp, J.M., 2004. Integrating Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) into ISO Management Systems- in Search of a Feasible CSR Management System Framework. The TQM Magazine ,1 (3), pp. 216-224.

Chrysside, G. & Kaler, J., 1996. Essentials of Business Ethics . London: McGraw-Hill

Crane, A. & Matten, D., 2007. Business Ethics . 2 nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Davis, A., 2006. A Strategic Approach to Corporate Governance . New York: Gower

Dellaportes, S., Gibson, K., Alagai., 2005. Ethics, Governance and Accountability . Melbourne: Wiley

DFID. 2003. “ DFID and Corporate Social Responsibility’. September. London: DFID.

European Commission., 2002. Corporate Social Responsibility: A Business Contribution to Sustainable Development. COM , July 2. 2002 (347) Official Publications of the European Commission: Brussels.

Fisher, C. & Lovell, A., 2003. Business Ethics and Values. London: FT Prentice Hall

George, R. T., 1999. Business Ethics . London: Prentice Hall

Hartman, L., 2004. Perspectives in Business Ethics . Burr Ridge: McGraw Hill.

Jackson, K., 2004. Building Reputational Capital . New York: Oxford University Press.

Knight F., 1980. The Ethics of Competition and other Essays . Chicago: University of Chicago Press

• Cultural Change at Texaco and Financial Crisis
• Electronic monitoring of employees
• UK Corporate Governance Code
• Strategic Planning for Public Relations
• Financial Management in Nonprofit Organizations
• Code of Ethics: Shell Oil
• Moral Problem: McDonald’s Company
• Moral Development and Ethical Concepts
• Sustainable, Ethical Business and Marketing Practices
• Corporate Social Responsibility: Economic, Environmental and Social Impacts
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, May 2). Corporate Social Responsibility. https://ivypanda.com/essays/corporate-social-responsibility-term-paper/

"Corporate Social Responsibility." IvyPanda , 2 May 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/corporate-social-responsibility-term-paper/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'Corporate Social Responsibility'. 2 May.

IvyPanda . 2019. "Corporate Social Responsibility." May 2, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/corporate-social-responsibility-term-paper/.

1. IvyPanda . "Corporate Social Responsibility." May 2, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/corporate-social-responsibility-term-paper/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Corporate Social Responsibility." May 2, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/corporate-social-responsibility-term-paper/.

Research paper

Three essays on corporate social responsibility decoupling

About this item.

This thesis provides a detailed examination of Corporate Social Responsibility Decoupling (CSRD), corporate governance, financial resource constraints (FRC) and firm’s Life Cycle Stages (LCS). The research consists of three dynamic and interrelated essays that examine the CSRD literature and determinants of CSRD behaviour. The first essay is a systematic literature review (SLR) of the CSRD literature. The second and third essays are quantitative studies that estimate regression models, includ...

What can I do with this item?

Check copyright status and what you can do with this item

Report this item

If you believe this item breaches our terms of use please report this item

DigitalNZ brings together more than 30 million items from institutions so that they are easy to find and use. This information is the best information we could find on this item. This item was added on 29 March 2024 , and updated 10 September 2024 . Learn more about how we work.

What is the copyright status of this item?

All Rights Reserved

This item is all rights reserved, which means you'll have to get permission from University of Otago before using it.

More Information

University of Otago has this to say about the rights status of this item:

All items in OUR Archive are provided for private study and research purposes and are protected by copyright with all rights reserved unless otherwise indicated.

You must always check with University of Otago to confirm the specific terms of use, but this is our understanding:

Non-infringing use

NZ Copyright law does not prevent every use of a copyright work. You should consider what you can and cannot do with a copyright work.

You may not copy and/or share this item with others without further permission. This includes posting it on your blog, using it in a presentation, or any other public use.

No modifying

You are not allowed to adapt or remix this item into any other works.

No commercial use

You may not use this item commercially.

Related items