Search results

This paper takes a critical look at the meaning of corporate social responsibility (CSR) based on the available literature on the subject matter. As CSR is an evolving concept both in meaning and practice, this study aims to highlight CSR actions of the world's six largest organizations (Google, Twitter, Amazon, Apple, ExxonMobil and Walmart). The purpose of choosing these organizations and their CSR adoption was to examine the business-society relationship and the role of key stakeholders in establishing this association.

This study examined CSR through the case study approach and provides valuable insights by showing that CSR is a connecting link between business and society. Specifically, the authors took a crucial look at various contentious, often ambiguous definitions, theoretical framework, brief historical development, issues and controversies surrounding it, the role of CSR in community development and summing it up with the future direction and managerial implications.

This study observed that there are some developmental strategies taking place today which are relevant to the issue at stake, such as: contributing to the world economy, corporations donating or engaging in a wide range of philanthropic gestures now than ever and contributing to the beauty of the society by meeting rising community expectations.

By analyzing the worlds' 6 largest companies' CSR initiatives, this study provides valuable insights by showing that CSR is a connecting link between business and society and is based on win-win collaborations between civil society, business, investors and government. These companies' CSR initiatives have been mostly unexplored in past studies.

This paper aims to conceptualize how business and society co-evolve their efforts to maximizing the greatest well-being of the greatest number following a conscious-unconscious, staged, dialectical process.

This study used a conceptual framework linking eight components of well-being (economic, environmental, social, cultural, psychological, spiritual, material and physical), with stages of consciousness and the co-evolution of business and society.

Stages of consciousness – traditionalist, modernist, post-modernist and integral – moderate both the pace and direction with which business and society co-evolve to the greatest well-being of the greatest number across eight components of well-being.

This is a conceptual framework which integrates existing empirical relationships, but the overall framework itself is yet to be empirically tested.

The whole process of maximizing well-being can become more conscious for both business and society. This requires making unconscious components conscious and becoming conscious of the inseparability of the eight components of well-being as a counter-balanced set.

Businesses and societies can maximize well-being across eight inseparable components. But implementing this is a staged process requiring progressing populations through stages of consciousness. Earlier stages lay the platform for a critical mass of people able to integrate the eight components.

Knowledge of well-being is dominated by disciplinary disconnection and bivariate studies; yet, current meta-crises and calls for post-conventional leaders indicate the importance of an integrated multidisciplinary well-being model which explains past efforts of business and society, diagnoses current problems and points towards more viable paths.

While there has been an explosion of theoretical work in the field of Business and Society over the past several years, much of this work still reflects a key philosophical assumption about the way business and society should be viewed that has been operative in the field since its beginnings. This assumption undergirds the title for the field and has infused itself into stakeholder theory, normative theory, and social contract theory, which are the main theoretical approaches that have emerged in the field. This basic assumption is critically analyzed and questioned in this article, and another philosophical framework, one based on American Pragmatism and not based on this assumption, is offered as an alternative way to view the corporation and its relationship to society. The implications of this alternative for the Business and Society field are then explored.

The equation of unified knowledge says that S = f (A,P) which means that the practical solution to a given problem is a function of the existing, empirical, actual realities and the future, potential, best possible conditions of general stable equilibrium which both pure and practical reason, exhaustive in the Kantian sense, show as being within the realm of potential realities beyond any doubt. The first classical revolution in economic thinking, included in factor “P” of the equation, conceived the economic and financial problems in terms of a model of ideal conditions of stable equilibrium but neglected the full consideration of the existing, actual conditions. That is the main reason why, in the end, it failed. The second modern revolution, included in factor “A” of the equation, conceived the economic and financial problems in terms of the existing, actual conditions, usually in disequilibrium or unstable equilibrium (in case of stagnation) and neglected the sense of right direction expressed in factor “P” or the realization of general, stable equilibrium. That is the main reason why the modern revolution failed in the past and is failing in front of our eyes in the present. The equation of unified knowledge, perceived as a sui generis synthesis between classical and modern thinking has been applied rigorously and systematically in writing the enclosed American‐British economic, monetary, financial and social stabilization plans. In the final analysis, a new economic philosophy, based on a synthesis between classical and modern thinking, called here the new economics of unified knowledge, is applied to solve the malaise of the twentieth century which resulted from a confusion between thinking in terms of stable equilibrium on the one hand and disequilibrium or unstable equilibrium on the other.

Reviews the development of the corporate social responsibility (CSR) concept and its four components: economic, legal, ethical and altruistic duties. Discusses different perspectives on the proper role of business in society, from profit making to community service provider. Suggests that much of the confusion and controversy over CSR stem from a failure to distinguish among ethical, altruistic and strategic forms of CSR. On the basis of a thorough examination of the arguments for and against altruistic CSR, concurs with Milton Friedman that altruistic CSR is not a legitimate role of business. Proposes that ethical CSR, grounded in the concept of ethical duties and responsibilities, is mandatory. Concludes that strategic CSR is good for business and society. Advises that marketing take a lead role in strategic CSR activities. Notes difficulties in CSR practice and offers suggestions for marketers in planning for strategic CSR and for academic researchers in further clarifying the boundaries of strategic CSR.

Furnishes a narrative reflecting an in‐depth examination of managerial conceptions of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in the Irish context. The narrative locates itself within the debate surrounding the extent to which corporate management may capture social accountants’ efforts to promote a broad society‐centred conception of CSR. Three key findings emerge from the narrative. First, there is evidence of a tendency for managers to interpret CSR in a constricted fashion consistent with corporate goals of shareholder wealth maximisation. Second, pockets of robust resistance to and defences of this narrow conception do, however, also emerge in the narrative. Third, the complexity of conceiving of a clear meaning for CSR, particularly for those exposed to the structural pressures encountered by these managers, is apparent. This is evident in the initial, somewhat contradictory, nature of many of the conceptions analysed. Reflects on these findings and considers their broad implications for social accountants’ attempts to promote greater society centred corporate accountability in Ireland.

The purpose of this paper is twofold: to determine the extent to which companies’™ efforts of sustainable business practices consider stakeholders within their organisations, business networks, the marketplace and society, and to develop and test a stakeholder construct in the context of companies’™ business sustainability efforts within their business networks, the marketplace and society by identifying underlying dimensions and items.

A mixed-method approach was used. First, qualitative research involving a case study approach was followed so as to describe how companies in different industries in Norway implement and manage sustainable business practices. This was followed by a quantitative research phase to empirically measure and test a stakeholder construct in the context of business sustainability efforts, which is reported here.

The results report both an initial factor solution as well as a refined factor solution. The factor analyses confirmed five stakeholder dimensions related to business sustainability in a cross-industry sample of organisations, their business networks, marketplace and society. These include: the focal company, downstream stakeholders, societal stakeholders, market stakeholders and upstream stakeholders. The results indicate satisfactory convergent, discriminant and nomological validity, as well as reliability of each dimension.

The study provides a stakeholder construct in the context of business sustainability efforts in focal companies and their business networks, the marketplace and society, based upon five common dimensions. The multi-dimensional framework may be used in both qualitative and quantitative research in future. It may also be used to assess stakeholders’™ business sustainability efforts.

The multi-dimensional framework is useful for practitioners to obtain an indication of stakeholders’™ business sustainability efforts in relation to focal companies and their business networks, the marketplace and society.

The study provides a general stakeholder construct in the context of business sustainability efforts in business networks, the marketplace and society. The proposed framework can be incorporated in further studies and could be used to assess the general status of stakeholders’™ sustainability efforts in their networks, the marketplace and society.

This study aims to investigate employees’ perceptions of socially responsible financial services brands in Saudi Arabia. The study also identifies the motives and challenges for Islamic banks for higher involvement in social responsibility initiatives to enhance their brand values.

An inductive approach was used in this study to identify the motives and challenges related to corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities. The research design uses a qualitative approach where in-depth interviews were carried out among the employees in the financial services sector in Saudi Arabia.

Findings provide insights about how CSR initiatives for financial services brands in a developing and Islamic country are perceived. Results show that the focus of CSR activities is on the attribute of CSR, the magnitude of CSR and attitude towards CSR. Results show two main motives to engage in CSR activities, which are instrumental and ethical motives. The main challenges are related to the government, business, charitable organisations and customers and society.

Implications exist for how CSR is perceived in a new context and in the financial services industry. Understanding the current perception of CSR from a financial service brand perspective helps policymakers to develop appropriate platforms for financial service providers to become more socially involved.

The major contribution of this study lies in investigating the CSR perception among the key stakeholder (i.e. the employees) from a brand management perspective in the Saudi Arabian financial services sector. Further, this study shows the main motives and challenges, which local financial service brands face to become socially responsible. The categories of attributes, magnitude and attitudes can be used to enhance brand value in one of the economically advanced countries in the Arabic world, Saudi Arabia. In the first category “attribute”, the perception of socially responsible banks are highlighted, while the elements of CSR, including its dimensions, are emphasised in the second category “magnitude”. The third category “attitude” shows two themes, including stakeholders’ issues and business-related issues.

The purpose of the study is to explain why some foreign firms are accepted in a host country, while others are not.

The paper is conceptual. It first articulates the meaning of firm acceptability in the eyes of host country societies, which remains ambiguous in the current literature. Second, using a social psychological theory, the paper explores the firm-level attributes that can shape the societal judgment of firms’ acceptability.

The paper suggests that foreign firms’ acceptability pertains to the perception to which they can contribute to the host country’s economic development and societal well-being. The judgment of this is carried out by emphasizing three types of organizational cues, which indicate firms’ capacity to contribute.

This conceptual paper contributes to the understanding of firms’ social acceptance in a host country by explicating the meaning of social acceptability and exploring the evaluation mechanism local actors adopt to judge foreign firms. The paper would benefit from empirical investigation by future research.

The meaning of social acceptability of foreign firms remains largely implicit in the literature; likewise, the evaluative mechanism of the firms’ acceptability is little researched. The paper addresses these two issues by undertaking a critical theory stance. It builds on a social psychology theory, multinational corporation (MNC) literature and economic nationalism, thus demonstrating a multidisciplinary approach.

The purpose of this is to trace the current changes in business and society and identify the forces that shape the new landscape. It is argued that any attempt to continue business as usual is doomed to fail.

The paper describes the change of paradigms that is taking place, and calls for respective alignment of business and political leaders. It further proposes that failure to perceive the changes or to take action, will lead to catastrophic consequences for people, organizations and society.

The paper concludes that there is a great need to change the fundamental principles of society away from dominance towards partnership and care; to change the fundamental paradigms which have stimulated the economy for centuries away from growth, towards transformation; to change the fundamental values underlying business from financial gain towards balanced values. The impact on economy and business would be far‐reaching, shifting their roles to focus on the real needs of people and society.

This paper proposes a roadmap to managing in tomorrow's landscape and is a wake‐up call to all people concerned with the future of our planet – political and business leaders, and scholars who conduct cross‐cultural research. Social responsibility needs to be taken seriously, and investment made in the future. Business and political leaders need to take the helm in this endeavor, and the role of the scholarly community is to provoke them to act.