Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2
3
ZDEMR DNER
2013
320
C.18, S.2
321
ZDEMR DNER
2013
only to themselves but also to the stakeholders within society (CSR Turkey
Baseline Report, 2010: 7)
With a few exceptions (e.g., Robin and Reidenbach, 1987), much of
the conceptual work in this area has stemmed out of the management
literature and has been scattered over four different research streams focusing
on corporate social responsibility (e.g., Bowen, 1953; Eilbirt and Parket,
1973; Carroll, 1979; Sethi, 1979), corporate social responsiveness (e.g.,
Ackerman and Bauer, 1976; Frederick, 1978), corporate social performance
(e.g., Carroll, 1979; Wood, 1991; Lewin et al., 1995), and stakeholder
management (e.g., Clarkson, 1995; Donaldson and Preston, 1995; Jones,
1995). A review of the research in these related areas suggests that corporate
citizenship can be defined as the extent to which businesses assume the
economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary responsibilities imposed on them
by their stakeholders (Maignan and Ferrell, 2001: 38).
2. DIMENSIONS OF CORPORATE CITIZENSHIP
The classification of corporate citizenships dimensions has
similarities with the dimensions of corporate social responsibility. In other
words in some cases they are consistent with each other. Therefore, in this
study there is a similar conceptualization.
In the definition of the Corporate Social Responsibility and
Corporate Citizenship, there are many classifications in the literature about
the dimensions of corporate citizenship, although in some cases using slightly
different phrasing. For example, Maignan and his colleagues (Maignan and
Ferrell, 2000, 2001; Maignan et. al., 1999) have defined CSR dimensions as
the extent to which businesses meet the economic, legal, ethical and
discretionary responsibilities imposed on them by their stakeholders. This is
largely synonymous with Carrolls (1991) definition of CSR dimensions
economic responsibility, legal responsibility, ethical responsibility and
philanthropic responsibility. The pyramid of corporate social responsibility
portrays the four components of CSR, beginning with the basic building
block notion that economic performance undergirds all else. At the same
time, business is expected to obey the law because the law is society's
codification of acceptable and unacceptable behavior. Next is business
responsibility to be ethical. At its most fundamental level, this is the
obligation to do what is right, just, and fair, and to avoid or minimize harm to
stakeholders (employees, consumers, the environment, and others). Finally,
business is expected to be a good corporate citizen. This is captured in the
philanthropic responsibility, wherein business is expected to contribute
financial and human resources to the community and to improve the quality
of life. Regarding to philanthropic responsibility the discretionary
responsibility has wider social and economic content. Although enterprises
perform the social responsibility activities in these four different areas, in the
social responsibility pyramid the size of the ethic and the discretionary
activities increasing every day (Carrol, 1991: 42).
322
C.18, S.2
323
ZDEMR DNER
2013
324
C.18, S.2
CORPORATE
CORPORATE
325
ZDEMR DNER
2013
C.18, S.2
327
ZDEMR DNER
2013
328
C.18, S.2
329
ZDEMR DNER
2013
330
C.18, S.2
331
1
Do not agree
N
2
Neither agree
nor disagree
N
%
3
Agree
Mean
%
2, 69
2, 76
2, 67
2, 32
2, 55
2, 85
2, 85
2, 83
2, 57
2, 87
2, 50
2, 75
2, 12
5
5
1
5
1
1
1
4, 1
4, 1
0, 8
4, 1
0, 8
0, 8
0, 8
4
7
21
12
4
3
4
3, 3
5, 8
17, 4
9, 9
3, 3
2, 5
3, 3
6
11
37
16
7
9
9
5, 0
9, 1
30, 6
13, 2
5, 8
7, 4
7, 4
106
98
62
88
109
108
107
87, 6
81, 0
51, 2
72, 7
90, 1
89, 3
88, 4
3
2
2
16
2, 5
1, 7
1, 7
13, 2
2
16
8
11
1, 7
13, 2
6, 6
9, 1
3
22
8
36
2, 5
18, 2
6, 6
29, 8
113
81
103
58
93, 4
66, 9
85, 1
47, 9
12
8
2
4
9, 9
6, 6
1, 7
3, 3
14
17
1
3
11, 6
14, 0
0, 8
2, 5
28
22
4
6
23, 1
18, 2
3, 3
5, 0
67
74
114
108
55, 4
61, 2
94, 2
89, 3
4, 1
11, 6
6, 6
2, 5
1, 7
7, 4
14
3
2
9
22
18, 2
99
119
82
81, 8
98, 3
67, 8
2, 24
2, 34
2, 90
2, 80
2, 60
2, 71
2, 97
2, 47
30
24, 8
1, 7
5, 8
82
67, 8
2, 17
ZDEMR DNER
2013
0
No idea
Our salespersons and employees are required to provide full and accurate information to
all customers.
Members of our organization follow professional standards.
Top managers monitor the potential negative impacts of our activities on our
community.
Discretionary
We are recognized as a good corporate citizenship.
Our business supports employees who acquire additional education.
Flexible company policies enable employees to better coordinate work and personal life.
Our business gives adequate contributions to charities.
A program is in place to reduce the amount of energy and materials wasted in our
business.
We encourage partnerships with local foundations.
We encourage partnerships with local businesses and schools.
The salaries offered by our company are higher than industry averages
Our business encourages employees to join civic organizations that support our
community.
Top managers believe that they have social responsibilities other than to ensure business
profit.
Our business supports local sports activities.
Our business supports local cultural activities.
We are recognized as a good corporation
332
1
Do not agree
2, 5
3, 3
2
Neither agree
nor disagree
8
6, 6
3
Agree
Mean
2
14
1, 7
11, 6
8
6
6, 6
5, 0
21
11
17, 4
9, 1
90
90
74, 4
74, 4
2, 64
2, 46
2
5
3
21
10
1, 7
4, 1
2, 5
17, 4
8, 3
3
10
29
2
9
2, 5
8, 3
24, 0
1, 7
7, 4
2
15
26
7
10
1, 7
12, 4
21, 5
5, 8
8, 3
114
91
63
91
92
94, 2
75, 2
52, 1
75, 2
76, 0
2, 34
2, 88
2, 59
2, 23
2, 39
2, 52
20
12
12
26
16, 5
9, 9
9, 9
21, 5
4
2
45
20
3, 3
1, 7
37, 2
16, 5
15
9
32
34
12, 4
7, 4
26, 4
28, 1
82
98
32
41
67, 8
81, 0
26, 4
33, 9
2, 31
2, 60
1, 69
1, 74
5, 0
7, 4
6, 6
98
81, 0
2, 64
9
5
7, 4
4, 1
17
8
2
14, 0
6, 6
1, 7
18
14
1
14, 9
11, 6
0, 8
77
94
118
63, 6
77, 7
97, 5
2, 35
2, 63
2, 96
106
87, 6
2, 79
C.18, S.2
333
ZDEMR DNER
2013
6. CONCLUSION
The four dimensions of CSR as economic, legal, ethical and
discretionary are confirmed in this study and they are positively evaluated by
the company and its employees. Additional to these dimensions, the overall
evaluation, people, planet and profit aspects (Glavas, 2009) can be
investigated in next studies. And also to get further information, to see
different aspects of CSR, to gain detailed information about the reason of this
perception, the context can be extended by using quantitative research
methodology.
This studys findings show that CSR dimensions are stressed
positively by both the company and its employees. Therefore, there is CSR
team in the company that supports the participation of the employees for the
CSR activities and the perception of the employees is investigated at least
once a year.
But the corporation stresses all dimensions strongly. Also there are
some differences for the components of CSR dimensions. The employees
believe less in legal CSR dimension especially related with diversity
management programmes and in discretionary CSR dimension related with
salary level compared with the other companies. All these perceptions are
related with employees. So it can be said the employee aspect of CSR
activities needs to be improved. The size and homogeneous feature of the
sample cause some constraints especially for making statistical based
analysis and evaluations.
These results can not be generalized. So, many other researches with
larger samples is required to make general decisions and find the reasons of
difference between the corporations evaluation and the employees
perception about some components of CSR dimensions. Also CSR and CC
support the employer branding positively and it is important to investigate the
other related subjects like organizational commitment, organizational
citizenship behaviour, intention to leave.
REFERENCES
1.
2.
3.
334
C.18, S.2
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
CSR
Turkey
Baseline
Report
(2010)
April,
//www.kssd.org/dl/csrbaselinereport.pdf , E.T: 10/04/2012
http:
10. DIRK, Matten. & Andrew Crane (2003) Corporate Citizenship: Towards
an extended theoretical conceptualization, Research Paper Series
International Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility, nternational
Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility Nottingham University
Business School
11. DUTTON, Jane E., Janet M. Dukerich and Celia V. Harquail, (1994).
Organizational images and member identification. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 39, 239-263.
12. EKIN, M. G. Serap. and Hande S. Tezlmez (1999) Business Ethics in
Turkey: An Empirical Investigation with Special Emphasis on Gender,
Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 8, ss. 583-595.
13. ERDEM, Ferda. (1996) letme Kltr, Friedrich-Naumann Vakf ve
Akdeniz niversitesi, Ankara.
14. European Commission (2012), Corporate social responsibility A
business contribution to sustainable development, Employment & social
affairs, Industrial relations and industrial change, Directorate-General for
Employment , and Social Affairs, Unit D.1, Manuscript completed in
July 2002
15. Frederick, William C., (1994) From CSR1 to CSR2, Business and
Society 33(2), 150164.
16. GLAVAS , Ante, (2009) Effects Of Corporate Citizenshp On
Employees: Why Does Dong Good Matter? Department Of
Organizational Behavior, Case Western Reserve Unversty, Phd Thesis,
August.
17. GCENOLU, Ceyhun and In Onan (2008) Customer Social
Responsibility Report in Turkey, Ankara.
335
ZDEMR DNER
2013
C.18, S.2
337