This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
ILLUSTRATE PORTRAYALS OF CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY:
A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE CORPORATE PLANET
What is it?
CSR on its way to Europe,America & India CSR in comparative perspective Implicit CSR and explicit CSR as complimentary elements of CSR
Implications for a research agenda in CSR
a. Implicit CSR and „National Business Systems“ b. Explicit CSR and the global diffusion of management concepts
The idea is the business has a duty to its wider community – beyond staying within the law and satisfying stakeholders .WHAT IS IT? Good question. As the „Gaia‟ of business. corporate social responsibility (CSR) seems to have attained all the holistic mystery of a Hollywood new-age religion. the European Commission‟s take seems as good as any. And since there are almost as many definitions of CSR as there are companies who say they‟re doing it. CSR has also been described as business‟ contribution to sustainable development (meeting the needs of today without compromising the needs of future generations). Brussels bureaucrats define CSR as “a concept whereby companies decide voluntarily to contribute to a better society and a cleaner environment”.
vague awareness of the relationship between companies and social / environmental issues to the identification of a more defined set of management tools and rules of conduct . one encompasses the efforts of policy makers and organizations to spread the idea of socially responsible behaviour and CSR practices through initiatives. The other path includes academics research.CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY as an european concept The evolution of the concept of CSR and the related issues of social and environmental accountability can be seen as the result of two parallel paths. which has progressed from an initial. formal definitions and so on.
. or stockholders. the local community. customers." The stakeholder concept is discussed more fully in a later section. suppliers. Collectively. responsibility is to its owners. A traditional view of the corporation suggests that its primary. ethical. state. the various groups affected by the actions of an organization are called "stakeholders. CSR requires organizations to adopt a broader view of its responsibilities that includes not only stockholders. including employees. local. However. and federal governments.CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY as an american concept The American concept of corporate social responsibility means that organizations have moral. and other special interest groups. environmental groups. if not sole. but many other constituencies as well. and philanthropic responsibilities in addition to their responsibilities to earn a fair return for investors and comply with the law.
motivated by the belief that essentially society was providing capitalists with an opportunity to manage resources that should really be seen as a form of trusteeship on behalf of society in general. Today. .CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY as an indian concept Gandhi was a person who in several respects was ahead of his time. we are perhaps coming round full circle in emphasizing this concept through an articulation of the principle of social responsibility of business and industry. His view of the ownership of capital was one of trusteeship.
CSR in comparative perspective: rights and status of employees Working conditions. working time or benefits are dominant topics in the area of CSR in the American context US example: since 2004 Starbucks Coffee provides a basic health insurance for all franchisees working more than 20 days/month • Social security of employees in Europe is typically subject to numerous laws and regulations and embedded in a welfare state approach • UK: default health insurance through National Health Service (NHS) • Germany: membership in health insurance is mandatory („gesetzliche“ Krankenversicherung). employer„s contribution to the monthly premium is defined in the law .
39% in UK 2000: as part of the CSR policies. 65% in Sweden. 50% in Germany. McDonalds. Gerber and McCain issue voluntary self-commitment not to use GMOs . only 18 in EU. 1999: 60% of food in US contains GMOs Significant differences in the risk percepton of GMOs (1998): 14% anti in US. EU-Commission is rather conservative (Vogel 2002) Until 2002: 58 GMOs were released in the US.CSR in comparative perspective: genetic engineering Laisser faire approach of Federal Drug Agency and US Department of Agriculture.
Carnegie etc. no significance for companies NL or F (Maignan & Ralston 2002) Corporate donations to education in US in 1998: $ 3.) Most European education systems rely heavily or even exclusively on state money .8bill from foundations such as Ford.CSR in comparative perspective: education Second most important CSR issue for US companies.25bill (+ 3.
CSR AS AGGREGATE OF IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT ELEMENTS Social salience of a CSR issue CSR as implicit element of the institutional framework of corporations CSR as an explicit element of corporate policies Intensity of the institutional framework USA European Countries .
IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT CSR: THE EXAMPLE OF HEALTH CARE Social salience of a CSR issue Health insurance courtesy of Starbucks Coffee Implicit CSR Health insurance in the NHS Explicit CSR Intensity of the institutional framework USA European Countries .
IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT CSR: THE EXAMPLE OF GMOs Social salience of a CSR issue Implicit CSR McDonalds voluntarily refrains from GMOs Risk averse regulatory approach of EU Commission Explicit CSR Intensity of the institutional framework USA European Countries .
norms and rules which result in (chiefly codified and mandatory) requirements for corporations Consists of voluntary corporate policies. programs and strategies Motivated by the perceived expectations of all stakeholders of the corporation Motivated by the societal consensus on the legitimate expectations towards the role and contribution of all major groups in society.DEFINITION OF CSR AS A DUAL CONSTRUCT Explicit CSR Describes all corporate activities to assume responsibility in society Implicit CSR Describes all formal and informal institutions of a society which assign and define the extent of corporate responsibility for the interests of an entire society Consists of values. including corporations .
Implicit CSR and the National Business Systems-approach (Whitley) Historically grown institutional framework of a country Political system Financial system Education and Labour system Cultural system “National Business System” Nature of the firm Organization of market processes Authoritative coordination and control systems .
NL. CH.NBS approach as a framework for research into implicit CSR 30 years of established research tradition in comparative research in Europe (e. S. P) Eastern European (PL. Kristensen.) Key finding that NBS only change slowly over time – if at all Allows for research into national systems of CSR . ES. SK. Sorge. I. DK) Rhenish (D. N. CZ. LUX. H. IRL) Nordic (SF.g. Clark. A. F. Child. Whitley. B. Kieser. Lane) Conceptualization of divergent models of capitalism in Europe Anglo-saxon (GB. Maurice. SLO etc.
Highly regulated markets for labour Powerful position of trade unions and industry associations Trust and authority relations in the model of the ‚rhenish capitalism„ (Albert 1991) .Implicit CSR and European National Business Systems Stronger role of the state in risk sharing and coordination of the economy Relatively minor role of capital markets.
Neo-Institutionalism explains the global diffusion of management concepts and practices beyond national or industry borders („Business Re-engineering“. Meyer 2000). in the aggregate. constitute a recognized area of institutional life: key suppliers. „rational‟ organizational practice occurs because it is regarded as legitimate within the „organizational field‟ (Meyer and Rowan 1977. Scott 2001). regulatory agencies.. .Explicit CSR and Neo-Institutionalism „Organizational fields‟ as „those organizations that. and other organizations that produce similar services and products” (DiMaggio and Powell 1983). TQM etc. Lean Management. resource and product consumers. New. ISO 9000.
. especially in the context of professional and ecucational associations and industry associations.Ligitimacy of management practice through . . norms. demands.. expectations. laws which have to be respected to avoid sanctions of loss of trust „Mimetic Processes“ increasingly complex technologies. goal ambiguities and uncertainty causes managers to just imitate „best practices“ „Normative Pressures“ professionalization of the management craft by way of an increase in formal degrees and global networks. „Coercive Isomorphisms“ external rules.
self-commitments) Dominant role of ecological/environmental issues Philanthropy only of marginal importance Secular approach . Poldermodel.B. NGOs) Corporate involvement in regulatory processes (z. trade unions. industry associations.Peculiarities of European explicit CSR Pivotal role of regulating/governmental bodies Multistakeholder-approach (government.
. meanings and connotations depending on the institutional and national context Instrumental implications: corporate CSR has to be adapted to and contextualized in a specific institutional and national environment Normative implications: revisiting the core assumptions of CSR in the Anglo-Saxon debate. regulatory solutions to the problem (that is: implicit CSR) ... Implications of the proposed framework Descriptive implications: CSR has different contents.. which sees CSR (that is: explicit CSR) as an approach to locate social responsibilities of corporations which is better and more appropriate than collective.CONCLUSIONS..
Changes in the „organizational field‟ of companies popularise CSR as a management idea. practiced CSR as a natural/self-evident response to the institutional framework of business. they did not use the label of CSR for this.CSR in worldwide: Back to the research questions Why was CSR not discussed in Europe before? European companies have ever been socially responsible. however. . What are the reasons that CSR is becoming an issue now? CSR gets on the agenda in India now because Globalisation confronts Indian and other MNCs with contexts which institutionalize social responsibility in a different way from their respective home countries.
B.REFERENCES Albert. Lammers. 1991. 2002. Matten & J. K. A.B. Carroll. D. Business & Society.A Three Countries Comparative Study' Business and Society Review. In C. Organizations alike and unlike: Inter-national and inter-institutional studies in the sociology of organizations: 251-271. Business & society : ethics and stakeholder management (5. Capitalisme contre capitalisme.evolution of a definiti-onal construct. & Kieser. 109:4. A. J. Corporate social responsibility . 449-477. Bondy. M. ed.K. Ohio: South-Western College Pub. A. & Buchholtz. 1999. 1979. Moon. 'The Adoption of Voluntary Codes of Conduct in MNCs . & D./Thomson Learning.). Organization and managerial roles in British and West German companies: An examination of the culturefree thesis.).. .. Hickson (ed. Child. London: Routledge.. A.J. 2004. 38(3): 268-295.J. Carroll. Cincinnati. Paris: LeSeuil.