Search results

The evolution of capitalism has gone through four major epochs, from the first tangible exchanges of goods and resources, to the generation of wealth by entrepreneurs held personally accountable for their actions, to cost-cutting measures for increasing efficiencies and maximizing wealth for the few, and finally to a socially irresponsible form. The fourth epoch dispatched the last remaining shards of capitalist responsibility to anyone but investors, as the basis of wealth appropriation shifted to manipulating the speculative future worth of intangible or fictitious capital. This evolution through four epochs has sadly been a process of diminishing value creation (Boje et al., 2017).

We are trapped in an era of socially irresponsible capitalism with little respect for humankind. But, it was not always this way. The earliest references to entrepreneurial behavior emerged in the east during the Han Dynasty and in the west in the eighteenth century. Somewhat like the fourth epoch of the twenty-first century, these global beginnings of early capitalism were also directed by opportunistic desires to pursue wealth generation by taking advantage of people’s needs and wants. Although capitalists have consistently been the prime directors of resources and the distributors of wealth, in the early epochs of capitalism they were different. The early epoch entrepreneurs bore personal risks of business failure, consequences that might impact them for a lifetime.

The antenarrative generative mechanisms, or spirals, help us understand the interconnectivities of “real” and “actual” domains of reality (Bhaskar, 1975; Boje, 2016). Socially irresponsible capitalism is pulling global societies into a downward spiral toward an addiction of speculative destruction and dehumanization, transforming “real” into “actual” realities. We need a force to pull us back up toward a revitalized form of socially responsible capitalism. This force is called the socio-economic approach to management (SEAM), and in the responsible entrepreneurial spirit of earlier epochs, the path to recovery can be accomplished by accountably working with one organization or entity at a time.

This chapter first investigates the historical double-spiral-helix footsteps of socially irresponsible capitalism in the making. Then through a SEAM project example, we discuss how the micro-societal perspective of an organization places it at a deeper level of reality, deeper within the double-spiral-helix meta-reality of macro-societal capitalism. Finally, we demonstrate how the socioeconomic approach can help diagnose the deeper realities with an organization, beyond the evident narratives, to reveal the third spiral of deficiencies. This third spiral disenables the organization’s ability to activate the micro forces of socially responsible capitalism.

Purpose – This chapter engages critically with the ideas of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and irresponsibility (CSI) in order to examine their utility for the purposes of realizing more socially just and environmentally sustainable social and economic practices.

Methodology/approach – The chapter develops Marx's understanding of the twin pressures of class struggle and inter-capitalist competition in setting the limits of agency for corporate actors. It is thus theoretical and discursive in nature.

Findings – The findings of the chapter suggest that the scope for corporate agency in relation to responsibility/irresponsibility is severely limited by inter-capitalist competition and capitalist social relations. It therefore argues that those interested in social justice and environmental sustainability should focus on these structural pressures rather than theorizing corporate agency.

Social implications – The research suggests that the focus of academic and government attention should be on resolving the contradictions and exploitative social relations inherent in capitalism. Without this emphasis activism, corporate agency and government action will not eradicate the types of problem that advocates of CSR/CSI are concerned about.

Originality/value of paper – The value of the paper is that it contests and engages critically with the utility of the notion of CSR and the emergent concept of CSI. It asks proponents of these concepts to think seriously about the structural pressures and constraints within which business and policy makers act.

This book is a policy proposal aimed at the democratic left. It is concerned with gradual but radical reform of the socio‐economic system. An integrated policy of industrial and economic democracy, which centres around the establishment of a new sector of employee‐controlled enterprises, is presented. The proposal would retain the mix‐ed economy, but transform it into a much better “mixture”, with increased employee‐power in all sectors. While there is much of enduring value in our liberal western way of life, gross inequalities of wealth and power persist in our society.

The purpose of this paper is to revisit the debate and reorient research on corporate social responsibility (CSR), empirically documents the political-ideological biases inherent in CSR. It concludes with possible remedies to this problem.

The approach taken in this literature review is informed by the author’s viewpoint on the growing industry of social activists, who are pushing business toward the adoption of an ever-growing panoply of quasi-regulations commonly identified as CSR. The approach is complemented by a critique of stakeholder theory.

The literature review provides empirical support for Milton Friedman’s (1970) claim that the values underpinning CSR are driven by a socialist-collectivist agenda, which is inherently opposed to capitalist/libertarian values of free enterprise and individualism.

Without critical reflection on the leftwing ideology instantiated by CSR, the business community may unwittingly adopt and sustain values that undermine free markets.

Without critical reflection on the leftwing ideology instantiated by CSR, business and research communities may unwittingly promote values that, stealth-like, undermine individual liberty and the capitalist foundations of free markets.

The purpose of this chapter is to introduce and provide an overview of the topic of corporate social responsibility (CSR). The approach is to present an introduction to the importance of the topic and a review of the concept’s evolution and development which includes an exploration of the topic’s meaning and competing and complementary frameworks which are related. Among these related concepts are the following: business ethics, stakeholder management, sustainability, corporate citizenship, creating shared value, conscious capitalism, and purpose-driven business. These concepts are frequently used interchangeably with CSR, and they have more in common than differences. At their core, each embraces value, balance, and accountability. The chapter also explores a number of key research avenues that are quite contemporary. Among these, the following topics are addressed: political CSR; the CSP–CFP relationship and business case for CSR; upstream/downstream CSR; CSR in emerging economies, corporate social activism, and corporate social irresponsibility. In the final analysis, it is argued that the topic of CSR continues to be on an upward and sustainable trajectory in both conceptual development and practice.

The purpose of this paper is to carry out a review of the academic literature about corporate social irresponsibility (CSIR) highlighting aspects that help us to define socially irresponsible behaviour and its relationship with socially responsible behaviour.

Through a Boolean search of studies related to terms of irresponsibility undertaken from 1956 to October 2016, the authors develop a review of the literature focussing on the main perspectives used for defining the term of CSIR.

The paper provides a framework of three main dimensions for understanding the differences in the literature that defines CSIR: who defines irresponsible behaviour, an impartial observer or a specific group of stakeholders, whether it is a firm strategy or a punctual action and which is the relationship between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and CSIR, continuity vs orthogonal relationship.

The paper provides and extensive and original review of a key construct, CSIR, and develops some insights about its antecedents and consequences. The authors try to provide light to the contradictory situation where a growing interest in CSR and the increase in voluntary commitments adopted by company leaders incorporating CSR into their strategies are, paradoxically, increasingly associated with CSIR.

The 2008/2009 World Financial Crisis underlined the importance of social responsibility for the sustainable functioning of economic markets. Heralding an age of novel heterodox economic thinking, the call for integrating social facets into mainstream economic models has reached unprecedented momentum. Financial Social Responsibility bridges the finance world with society in socially conscientious investments. Socially Responsible Investment (SRI) integrates corporate social responsibility in investment choices. In the aftermath of the 2008/2009 World Financial Crisis, SRI is an idea whose time has come. Socially conscientious asset allocation styles add to expected yield and volatility of securities social, environmental, and institutional considerations. In screenings, shareholder advocacy, community investing, social venture capital funding and political divestiture, socially conscientious investors hone their interest to align financial profit maximization strategies with social concerns. In a long history of classic finance theory having blacked out moral and ethical considerations of investment decision making, our knowledge of socio-economic motives for SRI is limited. Apart from economic profitability calculus and strategic leadership advantages, this paper sheds light on socio-psychological motives underlying SRI. Altruism, need for innovation and entrepreneurial zest alongside utility derived from social status enhancement prospects and transparency may steer investors’ social conscientiousness. Self-enhancement and social expression of future-oriented SRI options may supplement profit maximization goals. Theoretically introducing potential SRI motives serves as a first step toward an empirical validation of Financial Social Responsibility to improve the interplay of financial markets and the real economy. The pursuit of crisis-robust and sustainable financial markets through strengthened Financial Social Responsibility targets at creating lasting societal value for this generation and the following.

This chapter discusses the Operation Lava Jato (or Operation Car Wash) which is an ongoing investigation in Brazil, since 2014, by the Federal Police and the Federal Public Ministry. This Operation triggered systemic and endemic corruption among companies, self-described as socially responsible, the State, and Brazilian Government. The analysis is based on empirical data available on the internet and in the Brazilian press about “Operation Car Wash” (Operation Lava Jato) and its socio-legal implications. We conclude that when a society has a historical and cultural tradition permeated by close private and patrimonial relations between government and companies, this fact negatively impacts the economic performance and the adoption of ethical behavior and social responsibility. This case study examines the recent police investigation into corruption involving companies and governments in a Latin American country. It provides empirical and historical data on the nature of the capitalism of ties model developed in Brazil that impacts on economic performance and the strategic proposal of corporate social responsibility.