Small Business Champions for Corporate Social Responsibility

While Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has traditionally been the domain of the corporate sector, recognition of the growing significance of the Small and Medium Sized Enterprise (SME) sector has led to an emphasis on their social and environmental impact, illustrated by an increasing number of initiatives aimed at engaging SMEs in the CSR agenda. CSR has been well researched in large companies, but SMEs have received less attention in this area. This paper presents the findings from a U.K. wide study of socially responsible SMEs. The 24 companies studied were chosen as “exemplars” of␣CSR in SMEs. The aim of this study therefore is to progress understanding of both the limitations on and opportunities for CSR in SMEs through the exploration of exemplary characteristics in the study companies. Key areas of investigation were CSR terminology, the influence of managerial values, the nature of SME CSR activities, motivation for and benefits from engaging in CSR, and the challenges faced. The results of this study demonstrate some of the exemplary goals and principles needed to achieve social responsibility in SMEs, and begin to provide knowledge that could be used to engender learning in other SMEs. In particular, there is evidence that stakeholder theory may provide a framework in which SMEs and CSR can be understood. SMEs prefer to learn through networking and from their peers, so this is a possible avenue for greater SME engagement in CSR. This would require strong leadership or “championing” from individuals such as highly motivated owner–managers and from exemplary companies as a whole.Heledd Jenkins is a Research Associate at The ESRC Centre for Business Relationships, Accountability, Sustainability and Society based at Cardiff University. She holds a degree in Geography from the University of Wales, Aberystwyth, and a Masters degree in Sustainability, Planning and Environmental Policy from Cardiff University. Heledd's research areas of interest include Corporate Social Responsibility, Small to Medium sized Enterprises, Stakeholders, the mining industry, business ethics, and social entrepreneurship.     

Public Policies on Corporate Social Responsibility: The Role of Governments in Europe

Over the last decade, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has been defined first as a concept whereby companies decide voluntarily to contribute to a better society and cleaner environment and, second, as a process by which companies manage their relationship␣with stakeholders (European Commission, 2001. Nowadays, CSR has become a priority issue on governments’ agendas. This has changed governments’ capacity to act and impact on social and environmental issues in their relationship with companies, but has also affected the framework in which CSR public policies are designed: governments are incorporating multi-stakeholder strategies. This article analyzes the CSR public policies in European advanced democracies, and more specifically the EU-15 countries, and provides explanatory keys on how governments have understood, designed and implemented their CSR public policies. The analysis has entailed the classification of CSR public policies taking into consideration the actor to which the governments’ policies were addressed. This approach to the analysis of CSR public policies in the EU-15 countries leads us to observe coinciding lines of action among the different countries analyzed, which has enabled us to propose a ‹four ideal’ typology model for governmental action on CSR in Europe: Partnership, Business in the Community, Sustainability, and Citizenship, and Agora. The main contribution of this article is to propose an analytical framework to analyze CSR public policies, which provide a perspective on the relationships between governments, businesses, and civil society stakeholders, and enable us to incorporate the analysis of CSR public policies into a broader approach focused on social governance. Laura Albareda is currently a Research Fellow at the Institute for Social Innovation, ESADE, Universidad Ramon Llull-URL. She is principal researcher and manager of the Observatory on Socially Responsible Investment in Spain. Her areas of research and academic interest are Corporate Social Responsibility, Business Ethics, Global Governance and Public Authorites, Governments and Public Policies on Corporate Social Responsibility and Socially Responsible Investment. Josep M. Lozano is currently Professor & Senior Researcher at the Institute for Social Innovation, ESADE Business School (URL). He is Co-founder of ética, Economía y Dirección (Spanish branch of the EBEN) and member of the editorial board of Ethical Perspectives and Society and Business Review. He was member of the Catalan Government’s Commission on Values, and is member of the Spanish Ministry of Employment and Social Affairs’ Commission of Experts on CSR. He has been a highly commended runner-up in the European Faculty Pioneer Awards of the Beyond Grey Pinstripes and is author of Ethics and Organizations. Understanding Business Ethics as a Learning Process (Kluwer). Tamyko Ysa is an Assistant Professor of the Institute of Public Management, and the Department of Business Policy at ESADE. Her areas of interest are the management of partnerships and their impact on the creation of public value; the design, implementation and evaluation of public policies, and the relations between companies and governments. She is the Principal Researcher of the Research Group for Leadership and Innovation in Public Management (GLIGP). She is coauthor of Governments and Corporate Social Responsibility (Palgrave MacMillan).     

Corporations,Stakeholders and Sustainable Development I: A Theoretical Exploration of Business–Society Relations

Sustainable development (SD) – that is, “Development that meets the needs of current generations without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs and aspirations” – can be pursued in many different ways. Stakeholder relations management (SRM) is one such way, through which corporations are confronted with economic, social, and environmental stakeholder claims. This paper lays the groundwork for an empirical analysis of the question of how far SD can be achieved through SRM. It describes the so-called SD–SRM perspective as a distinctive research approach and shows how it relates to the wider body of stakeholder theory. Next, the concept of SD is operationalized for the microeconomic level with reference to important documents. Based on the ensuing SD framework, it is shown how SD and SRM relate to each other, and how the two concepts relate to other popular concepts such as Corporate Sustainability and Corporate Social Responsibility. The paper concludes that the significance of societal guiding models such as SD and of management approaches like CSR is strongly dependent on their footing in society. Reinhard Steurer is a senior researcher and lecturer at the Research Institute for Managing Sustainability at the Vienna University of Economics and Business Adminstration. His research focuses on the changing roles of states, businesses and civil societies in the context of sustainable development. He is author and co-author of numerous articles, dealing with questions of how governments and businesses tackle the challenge of sustainable development, and what the two societal domains can learn from each other in doing so. He holds a Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Salzburg/Austria, and a Masters in Public Policy from the University of Maryland/U.S.A. Markus E. Langer studied ecology and environmental economics at the University of Vienna and the Vienna University of Economics and Business Adminstration as well as industrial environmental management at Yale University. He is currently working as Managing Director of FORUM Umweltbildung. Previously he was working since 1999 as a senior researcher and lecturer at the Research Institute for Managing Sustainability at the Vienna University of Economics and Business Adminstration. His research focused on the Evaluation of Sustainable Development as well as Corporate Social Responsibility and Stakeholder Management. Astrid Konrad studied business administration at the University of Graz. She has been working at the Research Institute for Managing Sustainability at the Vienna University of Economics and Business Adminstration since 2002. Her research focus is on Corporate Social Responsibility and Stakeholder Management. André Martinuzzi studied business adminstration at the Vienna University of Economics and Business Administration. He is working as a project manager at the Department of Environmental Economics and Management since 1993, as a lecturer at the Vienna University of Economics and Business Adminstration and leads the Managing Sustainability Research Centre since 1999. Since 2001 he worked as a scientific coordinator of Austria’s Sustainability Strategy. In 2003 he worked as a scientific editor of the Corporate Social Responsibility vision statement of the Austrian Industry and as a process consultant for the Austrian Forest Program. Research areas: Eco-Consulting, Corporate Sustainability, Evaluating Sustainable Development, Sustainability Strategies and Stakeholder Dialogues.     

Corporate Social Responsibility and Resource-Based Perspectives

Firms engage in corporate social responsibility (CSR) because they consider that some kind of competitive advantage accrues to them. We contend that resource-based perspectives (RBP) are useful to understand why firms engage in CSR activities and disclosure. From a resource-based perspective CSR is seen as providing internal or external benefits, or both. Investments in socially responsible activities may have internal benefits by helping a firm to develop new resources and capabilities which are related namely to know-how and corporate culture. In effect, investing in social responsibility activities and disclosure has important consequences on the creation or depletion of fundamental intangible resources, namely those associated with employees. The external benefits of CSR are related to its effect on corporate reputation. Corporate reputation can be understood as a fundamental intangible resource which can be created or depleted as a consequence of the decisions to engage or not in social responsibility activities and disclosure. Firms with good social responsibility reputation may improve relations with external actors. They may also attract better employees or increase current employees’ motivation, morale, commitment and loyalty to the firm. This article contributes to the understanding of why CSR may be seen as having strategic value for firms and how RBP can be used in such endeavour. Manuel Castelo Branco is Invited Lecturer of Accounting at the Faculty of Economics, University of Porto. He is a Ph.D. candidate at the School of Economics and Management, University of Minho. His research has been published in journals such as the Social Responsibility Journal and Corporate Communications: An International Journal. Lúcia Lima Rodrigues, Ph.D is Associate Professor at the School of Economics and Management, University of Minho. She is the Head of the Department of Management and the Director of the Master in Accounting and Management. She is the Editor of the Portuguese Journal of Accounting and Management, Editor for Europe of the international journal Accounting History. She is referee in several Portuguese and International journals. Her research has been published in several major international journals in Accounting such as The Accounting Historians Journal, Accounting Education: An International Journal, Critical Perspectives on Accounting and Accounting Forum.     

CSR Business as Usual? The Case of the Tobacco Industry

Tobacco companies have started to position themselves as good corporate citizens. The effort towards CSR engagement in the tobacco industry is not only heavily criticized by anti-tobacco NGOs. Some opponents such as the the World Health Organization have even categorically questioned the possibility of social responsibility in the tobacco industry. The paper will demonstrate that the deep distrust towards tobacco companies is linked to the lethal character of their products and the dubious behavior of their representatives in recent decades. As a result, tobacco companies are not in the CSR business in the strict sense. Key aspects of mainstream CSR theory and practice such as corporate philanthropy, stakeholder collaboration, CSR reporting and self-regulation, are demonstrated to be ineffective or even counterproductive in the tobacco industry. Building upon the terminology used in the leadership literature, the paper proposes to differentiate between transactional and transformational CSR arguing that tobacco companies can only operate on a transactional level. As a consequence, corporate responsibility in the tobacco industry is based upon a much thinner approach to CSR and has to be conceptualized with a focus on transactional integrity across the tobacco supply chain. Guido Palazzo is Assistant Professor for Business Ethics at the University of Lausanne (Switzerland). He graduated in Business Administration at the University of Bamberg (Germany) and earned his PhD in Political Philosophy (1999) from the University of Marburg (Germany). His research interests are in Corporate Social Responsibility, Corporate Branding, Democratic Theory, and Organizational Ethics. Ulf Richter is a doctoral student at the University of Lausanne. He is writing his thesis on Corporate Social Responsibility, conceptualizing the concept from a multidisciplinary perspective. He has studied in Germany, Peru and the US, and graduated from the European Business School, Oestrich-Winkel, majoring in International Management and Real Estate.     

What Corporate Social Responsibility Activities are Valued by the Market?

Corporate management is torn between either focusing solely on the interests of stockholders (the neo-classical view) or taking into account the interests of a wide spectrum of stakeholders (the stakeholder theory view). Of course, there need be no conflict where taking the wider view is also consistent with maximising stockholder wealth. In this paper, we examine the extent to which a conflict actually exists by examining the relationship between a company’s positive (strengths) and negative (concerns) corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities and equity performance. In general, we find little evidence to suggest that managers taking a wider stakeholder perspective will jeopardise the interest of its stockholders. However, our findings do suggest that the market is not only influenced by the independent CSR activities, but also the totality of these activities and that the facets that they value do vary over time. It seems that␣most recently, the market has valued most firms that satisfied minimum requirements in the areas of diversity and environmental protection but were most proactive in the area of employee-relations. Ron Bird is an Emeritus Professor in the School of Finance and Economics at the University of Technology, Sydney. His research interests focus on market implications of corporate social responsibility and also dysfunctionality within capital markets. He received his Master's degree in economics at Monash University in 1971. Anthony D. Hall is currently the Head of the School of Finance and Economics and Director of the Quantitative FinanceResearch Centre at the University of Technology, Sydney. His research interests cover all aspects of financial econometrics. He was awarded a PhD in econometrics from the London School of Economics in `976.Francesco Momente is Professor of Corporate Finance at the Bocconi University, Milan (Italy). His research intersts focus on the market valuation of corporate social responsibility and the value relevance of accounting information.He received his PhD in General Management at Ca' Foscari University, Venice (Italy) in 1998. Francesco Reggiani is Professor of Corporate Finance at the Bocconi University, Milan (Italy). His research interests focuson the market valuation of corporate social responsibility and corporate governance. He received his PhD in GeneralManagement at Bocconi University in 2001.     

Corporate Social Responsibility and Crony Capitalism in Taiwan

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has become increasingly popular in advanced economies in the West. In contrast, CSR awareness in Asia is rather low, both on the corporate and state level. However, recent events have shown that the CSR is receiving more attention by corporations in Asia. Recent development in CSR in Taiwan is one example of such a trend. A 2005 survey on the 700 publicly listed companies in Taiwan on␣CSR has highlighted the current CSR situation. Concurrently, the numbers of corporate scandals and corruption have dramatically increased over the past 6 years. Corporate CSR activities co-existing with pervasive corporate scandals create a phenomenon of contradictions. This article aims to report via the survey findings the current development of business ethics in corporate Taiwan; and to interpret the findings in context of Taiwan’s business ethos, especially its Confucian familism and crony capitalism. Po-Keung Ip, Ph.D., Professor of the Graduate Institute of Philosophy, National Central University, Taiwan. He is concurrently the Institute’s Director of the Applied Ethics Center. His research interests include business ethics, bioethics, and well-being of nations. His recent publications include Constructing a Social Contract for Corporations (2002), Business Ethics – Multistakeholder Responsibilities of the Corporation (2005) (in Chinese). Currently he is working on a book The Challenge of Corporate Social Responsibilities in Chinese Cultural Communities.     

CSR： New Engine of Economic Recovery

Nowadays, China has more and more focused Corporate Social Responsibility （CSR）. From October 2009, more than 600 Chinese companies have released CSR reports. According to statistics from China WTO Tribune, in 2009 China issued a total of 631 CSR reports, 3.73 times more than that released in 2008. On June 5, 2010, at the Fifth International CSR Forum, the ＂2009 GoldenBee CSR China Honor Roll＂ was held in Beijing. The Forum also released the ＂2009 China CSR Practice Benchmark Report＂,     

Does East Meet West in Business Ethics: An Introduction to the Special Issue

This article introduces and summarizes selected papers from the first World Business Ethics Forum held in Hong Kong and Macau in November 2006, co-hosted by the Hong Kong Baptist University and by the University of Macau. Business Ethics in the East remain distinct from those in the West, but the distinctions are becoming less pronounced and the ethical traffic flows both ways. Gabriel D, Donleavy is Professor and Dean of the Faculty of Business Administration at the University of Macau teaching Business Ethics, Business Negotiation and Advanced Management. His work has been published in Critical Perspectives in Accounting, Corporate Governance, the Journal of Business Ethics, Advances in Applied Business Strategy, the Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, Long Range Planning and the Asian Review of Accounting which he co-founded. Kit-Chun Joanna LAM is Professor in Department of Economics of the Hong Kong Baptist University. She is also Guest Professor in the Centre for Business Ethics of the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences, China. She received her Ph.D. degree in economics from Harvard University. Her work has appeared in the Journal of Business Ethics, Journal of Labor Economics, Canadian Journal of Economics, Economica, Journal of Comparative Economics, and Labour Economics. Simon S.M. Ho is Dean and Professor at the School of Business and Director for Corporate Governance and Financial Policy, Hong Kong Baptist University. He founded the Asia-Pacific Corporate Governance Conference and the world’s first master programme in corporate governance & directorship in 2004. He published over 40 academic refereed articles in leading journals such as Journal of Accounting, Accounting & Finance, Journal of Accounting & Public Policy, and Journal of Corporate Finance.     

Business Dilemmas and Religious Belief: An Explorative Study among Dutch Executives

This paper explores the relationship between religious belief and the dilemmas Dutch executives confront in daily business practice. We find that the frequency with which dilemmas arise is directly related to various aspects of religious belief, such as the belief in a transcendental being and the intensity of religious practice. Despite this relationship, only 17% of the dilemmas examined involve a religious standard. Most dilemmas originate from a conflict between moral and practical standards. We also find that 79% of the identified dilemmas stem from a conflict between two or more internalized standards of the executive.Johan Graafland is a Professor of Economics, Business and Ethics at Tilburg University and Director of the Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility at the Department of Philosophy of Tilburg University. He has published articles in The Journal of Business Ethics, Business Ethics: A European Review, Philosophia Reformatica, Journal of Corporate Citizenship, Applied Economics, Economics Letters, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Empirical Economics, Journal of Policy Modelling, Public Finances/Finances Publique, Economic Modeling, Journal of Public Economics and others. His current research interests are corporate social responsibility and philosophy of economics.Muel Kaptein is a Professor of Business Ethics and Integrity Management at the RSM Erasmus University, where he chairs the Department of Business-Society Management. Muel is also a Director at KPMG Integrity and Investigation Services. He has published articles in a number of journals, including The Journal of Business Ethics, Business & Society Review, Organization Studies, Academy of Management Review and European Management Journal. His most recent books are The Six Principles of Managing with Integrity (Spiro Press) and The Balanced Company (Oxford University Press). His research interests include the management of ethics, the measurement of ethics and the ethics of management. Muel is a Section Editor of the Journal of Business Ethics.Corrie Mazereeuw-van der Duijn Schouten is a senior researcher at the Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility at Tilburg University, the Netherlands. She has several years of experience as business consultant in the field of organizational change and group processes within organizations. Her research interests include leadership, religion and corporate social responsibility. She is currently working on a PhD thesis on religion and leadership.     

Strengthening Stakeholder–Company Relationships Through Mutually Beneficial Corporate Social Responsibility Initiatives

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) continues to gain attention atop the corporate agenda and is by now an important component of the dialogue between companies and their stakeholders. Nevertheless, there is still little guidance as to how companies can implement CSR activity in order to maximize returns to CSR investment. Theorists have identified many company-favoring outcomes of CSR; yet there is a dearth of research on the psychological mechanisms that drive stakeholder responses to CSR activity. Borrowing from the literatures on means-end chains and relationship marketing, we propose a conceptual model that explains how CSR provides individual stakeholders with numerous benefits (functional, psychosocial, and values) and how the type and extent to which a stakeholder derives these benefits from CSR initiatives influences the quality of the relationship between the stakeholder and the company. The paper discusses the implications of these␣insights and highlights a number of areas for future research.     

Filling the Empty Shell. The Public Debate on CSR in Austria as a Paradigmatic Example of a Political Discourse

Instead of essentializing and defining what CSR “is”, we analyze CSR as a political discourse in which different actors struggle to fill the empty shell of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) with a legitimate interpretation. In this paper we take the current debate on CSR in Austria as an example to demonstrate how this debate is shaped by changes in the greater socio-economic environment. We suggest that this debate might be paradigmatic for the development of CSR in the European/International context. We argue that the debate and the political moves concerning an implicit or an explicit concept of CSR are rooted in a more fundamental question: the societal (re-)embedding or disembedding of companies.     

The Harmonization and Convergence of Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting Standards

The goal of this article is to evaluate the future of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) reporting in terms of the harmonization of reporting standards. The evolution and convergence of financial reporting standards are compared to that of CSR reporting standards. In addition, four globally recognized CSR reporting standards are evaluated. The content of each standard is reviewed, a representative from each standard organization is interviewed, and the standards are evaluated for decision usefulness. This research suggests that the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) would be the best standard to provide decision useful information. This analysis is reinforced by recent events in the transformation of CSR reporting standards and provides insight into the possible future development of CSR reporting standards.     

The ‘Catch 22’ of communicating CSR: Findings from a Danish study

This research explored the apparent ‘Catch 22’ of communicating Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). Although companies are regularly encouraged to engage in CSR, they are simultaneously discouraged to communicate about this engagement. We contribute with two models that may help to explain how companies can best communicate about their CSR initiatives. Based on a reputation survey and two case studies of Danish corporate CSR frontrunners, first we develop an ‘inside‐out approach’ to suggest how managers can manage their CSR activities to achieve favourable CSR reputation in a ‘Catch 22’ context. Employees appear as a key component in building trustworthiness as CSR communication is shown to evolve when taking an ‘inside‐out approach’. Second, we develop a CSR communication model with two CSR communication processes targeting different stakeholder groups: ‘the expert CSR communication process’ and ‘the endorsed CSR communication process’. Integrating these models and processes may help companies strategically capture reputational advantage from their CSR initiatives.     

The Paradox of Corporate Social Responsibility Standards

The purpose of this paper is to provide a constructive criticism of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) standards. After pointing out a number of benefits and limitations in the effectiveness of CSR standards, both from a theoretical point of view and in the light of empirical evidence, we formulate and discuss a Paradox of CSR standards: despite being well-intended, CSR standards can favor the emergence of a thoughtless, blind and blinkered mindset which is counterproductive of their aim of enhancing the social responsibility of the organization. We analyze three problems that might underlie the Paradox—namely the problem of deceptive measurements; the problem of responsibility erosion and the problem of blinkered culture. We apply the philosophical tradition of American Pragmatism to reflect on these issues in relation to different types of existing standards, and conclude by suggesting a number of considerations that could help both CSR standards developers and users to address the Paradox.     

The Political Roots of Corporate Social Responsibility

This article argues that whether and how a firm chooses to adopt Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) initiatives is conditional in part upon the domestic political institutional structures present in its home market. It demonstrates that economic globalization has increased the pressure applied to companies to develop CSR policies that might help overcome specific governance gaps associated with the globalization phenomenon. Drawing upon an examination of domestic institutions and overall political structure, it argues that the political conditions and expectations present in a company’s home market will condition whether a firm might pursue CSR activity. For home markets, it is posited that perceived electoral salience will be filtered through government type and ideology, and state/societal structures will influence if and how firms will use CSR. Specific arguments are developed from these categorizations. The article concludes with a discussion of how researchers might further explore links between CSR, domestic political structures, and corporate political activity.     

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): Theory and Practice in a Developing Country Context

After providing an overview of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) research in different contexts, and noting the varied methodologies adopted, two robust CSR conceptualizations – one by Carroll (1979, ‘A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance’, The Academy of Management Review 4(4), 497–505) and the other by Wood (1991, ‘Corporate Social Performance Revisited’, The Academy of Management Review 16(4), 691–717) – have been adopted for this research and their integration explored. Using this newly synthesized framework, the research critically examines the CSR approach and philosophy of eight companies that are considered active in CSR in the Lebanese context. The findings suggest the lack of a systematic, focused, and institutionalized approach to CSR and that the understanding and practice of CSR in Lebanon are still grounded in the context of philanthropic action. The findings are qualified within the framework of existing contextual realities and relevant implications drawn accordingly. Dr. Jamali is Assistant Professor of Management at the Olayan School of Business, American University of Beirut. She holds a BA in Public Administartion from the American University of Beirut, and a Ph.D. in Social Policy and Administration, from the University of Kent at Canterbury, UK. Her research interests encompass corporate social responsibility, public private partnerships, learning organizations and women issues. She worked as an expert consultant on projects funded by the World Bank, the US Agency for International Development, NGOs, and other regional and local public and private firms. She is the author of numerous studies and international peer reviewed publications in various international journals, including the Journal of Management Development, the International Journal of Public Sector Management, the International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Business Process Management Journal, Public Works, Management and Policy and Women in Management Review. Ramez Mirshak Graduated with honors from the American University in Cairo (AUC) with a Bachelor of Arts in Business Administration in February 2001, then worked for two years in Egypt in the field of marketing and management. In 2004–2005, pursued his Masters of Business Administration at the American University of Beirut (AUB), researching primarily issues relating to change management and corporate social responsibility under the supervision of Dr. Dima Jamali, then joined a leading international financial institution as a regional Management Associate, while maintaining links with AUB and working on several research based projects.     

Benchmarking of Corporate Social Responsibility: Methodological Problems and Robustness

This paper investigates the possibilities and problems of benchmarking Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). After a methodological analysis of the advantages and problems of benchmarking, we develop a benchmark method that includes economic, social and environmental aspects as well as national and international aspects of CSR. The overall benchmark is based on a weighted average of these aspects. The weights are based on the opinions of companies and NGO's. Using different methods of weighting, we find that the outcome of the benchmark is rather robust for a sample of more than 50 large Dutch companies.     

From Management Systems to Corporate Social Responsibility

At the start of the 21st century, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) seems to have great potential for innovating business practices with a positive impact on People, Planet and Profit. In this article the differences between the management systems approach of the nineties, and Corporate Social Responsibility are analysed.An analysis is structured around three business principles that are relevant for CSR and management systems: (1) doing things right the first time, (2) doing the right things, and (3) continuous improvement and innovation. Basically CSR is focussing on the second principle, and management systems focus on the first. However, CSR is very likely to build on the management systems as well.From a CSR point of view, the existing generation of management systems with their focus on rational control (= doing things right) can only be of limited use in the development of CSR. However, the preventive rationalities of management systems are important. Values and the principle doing the right things is extremely relevant for CSR. This goes far beyond the present generation of ISO type management systems; opportunities stem from building on TQM approaches like the EFQM Business Excellence model. Continuous improvement and innovation is a permanent challenge underlying the two other business principles, and requires both individual and organisational learning processes. In the present generation of management systems, continuous improvement mainly addresses rational prevention, barely the value aspects of business.For the further development and implementation of CSR, each of the three business management principles are vital. There is a need for a new generation of management systems that addresses the values at stake in strategic decision-making, both at company level and in the behaviour of individuals, while the rationalities of prevention and anticipation are still relevant. In both directions more emphasis for continuous learning and innovation will be needed.CSR is likely to trigger the development of management systems in the directions mentioned. This will support companies to be credible and transparent in improving the performance with respect to people, planet and profit.     

A Holistic Corporate Responsibility Model: Integrating Values,Discourses and Actions

The corporate responsibility (CR) discussion has so far been rather fragmented as academics tackle it from their own areas of expertise, which guarantees in-depth analyses, but leaves room for broader syntheses. This research is a synthetic, interdisciplinary exercise: it integrates philosophical, psychological and managerial perspectives of corporate responsibility into a more holistic CR-model for the benefit of academics, companies and their interest groups. CR usually comprises three areas: environmental, social and economic responsibilities. In all these areas there should be a match between corporate values, discourses and actions. The aim of this multidisciplinary research is to build a CR-model by integrating (1) utilitarian/egoistic, duty/rights/justice and virtue ethical corporate values with (2) increased consciousness of psychological defences in corporate discourses, in order to achieve (3) responsible environmental, social and economic corporate actions. The resulting CR-model can be tested in companies and executed through corporate strategic and operational management. This paper was presented at the European Academy of Management (EURAM) Conference in Munich, 4–7 May 2005 (Ketola, 2005a). I would like to thank professor Stephan Laske for his insightful comments at the conference, which enabled me to revise the paper. Many thanks also for the anonymous reviewers of this journal for their further advice on finalizing the article. Tarja Ketola is Associate Professor of Sustainable Development at the University of Vaasa, Finland, and Adjunct Professor of Environmental Management at the Turku School of Economics, Finland. She took her Ph.D. at Imperial College, University of London, and worked as a Lecturer in the Department of Management Studies at Brunel University before returning to Finland. Her research interests include eco-psychological leadership, strategic environmental management and corporate responsiblity. She has written books and published articles in many journals, including Business Strategy and the Environment, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, Journal of Business Ethics, Sustainable Development and Long Range Planning.