PORTRAYALS OF CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

8/7/2019 PORTRAYALS OF CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

1/23

A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

OF THE CORPORATE PLANET

ILLUSTRATE PORTRAYALS OF CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY:

PRESENTATION OF RESEARCH THESIS

Swati Bhatia


2/23

THESIS STRUCTURE

What is it?

CSR on its way to Europe,America & India

CSR in comparative perspective

Implicit CSR and explicit CSR as complimentaryelements of CSR

Implications for a research agenda in CSR

a. Implicit CSR and National Business Systemsb. Explicit CSR and the global diffusion of management

concepts

Conclusions


3/23

WHAT IS IT?

Good question. As the Gaia of business, corporate socialresponsibility (CSR) seems to have attained all the holisticmystery of a Hollywood new-age religion. And since there arealmost as many definitions of CSR as there are companies who

say theyre doing it, the European Commissions take seems asgood as any. Brussels bureaucrats define CSR as a conceptwhereby companies decide voluntarily to contribute to a bettersociety and a cleanerenvironment.CSR has also been described as business contribution tosustainable development (meeting the needs of today withoutcompromising the needs of future generations). The idea is thebusiness has a duty to its wider community beyond stayingwithin the law and satisfying stakeholders


4/23

CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITYas an european concept

The evolution of the concept of CSR and the related issues ofsocial and environmental accountability can be seen as theresult of two parallel paths; one encompasses the efforts ofpolicy makers and organizations to spread the idea of socially

responsible behaviour and CSR practices through initiatives,formal definitions and so on. The other path includes academicsresearch, which has progressed from an initial, vagueawareness of the relationship between companies and social /

environmental issues to the identification of a more defined setof management tools and rules of conduct


5/23

CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITYas an american concept

The American concept of corporate social responsibility meansthat organizations have moral, ethical, and philanthropicresponsibilities in addition to their responsibilities to earn a fairreturn for investors and comply with the law. A traditional view of

the corporation suggests that its primary, if not sole,responsibility is to its owners, or stockholders. However, CSRrequires organizations to adopt a broader view of itsresponsibilities that includes not only stockholders, but many

other constituencies as well, including employees, suppliers,customers, the local community, local, state, and federalgovernments, environmental groups, and other special interestgroups. Collectively, the various groups affected by the actionsof an organization are called "stakeholders." The stakeholder

concept is discussed more fully in a later section.


6/23

CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITYas an indian concept

Gandhi was a person who in several respects was ahead of histime. His view of the ownership of capital was one of trusteeship,motivated by the belief that essentially society was providingcapitalists with an opportunity to manage resources that should

really be seen as a form of trusteeship on behalf of society ingeneral. Today, we are perhaps coming round full circle inemphasizing this concept through an articulation of the principleof social responsibility of business and industry.


7/23

CSR in comparative perspective:rights and status of employees

Working conditions, working time or benefits are dominanttopics in the area of CSR in the American context

US example: since 2004 Starbucks Coffee provides a basichealth 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 welfarestate approach

UK: default health insurance through National HealthService (NHS)

Germany: membership in health insurance is mandatory(gesetzliche Krankenversicherung); employers contributionto the monthly premium is defined in the law


8/23

CSR in comparative perspective:genetic engineering

Laisser faire approach of Federal Drug Agency and USDepartment of Agriculture; EU-Commission is ratherconservative (Vogel 2002)

Until 2002: 58 GMOs were released in the US; 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, 65% in Sweden, 50% in Germany, 39% inUK

2000: as part of the CSR policies, McDonalds, Gerber andMcCain issue voluntary self-commitment not to use GMOs


9/23

CSR in comparative perspective:education

Second most important CSR issue for US companies; nosignificance for companies NL or F (Maignan & Ralston 2002)

Corporate donations to education in US in 1998: $ 3.25bill (+

3.8bill from foundations such as Ford, Carnegie etc.)

Most European education systems rely heavily or evenexclusively on state money


10/23

CSR AS AGGREGATE OF IMPLICIT ANDEXPLICIT ELEMENTS

Social salience

of a CSR issue

European CountriesUSA

CSR as an explicitelement of corporate policies

Intensity of the institutional

framework

CSR as implicit element of theinstitutional framework

of corporations


11/23

IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT CSR:THE EXAMPLE OF HEALTH CARE

Social salience

of a CSR issue



framework

Implicit CSRHealth insurance courtesyof Starbucks Coffee

Health insurancein the NHS

Explicit CSR


12/23

IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT CSR:THE EXAMPLE OF GMOs

Social salience

of a CSR issue



framework

Implicit CSR

Explicit CSR

Risk averseregulatory approach

of EU CommissionMcDonalds voluntarilyrefrains from GMOs


13/23

DEFINITION OF CSRAS A DUAL CONSTRUCT

Explicit CSR Implicit CSR

Describes all corporate activities toassume responsibility in society

Describes all formal and informalinstitutions of a society which assign and

define the extent of corporateresponsibility for the interests of an entire

society

Consists of voluntary corporate policies,

programs and strategiesConsists of values, norms and ruleswhich result in (chiefly codified and

mandatory) requirements for corporations

Motivated by the perceived expectations

of all stakeholders of the corporationMotivated by the societal consensus onthe legitimate expectations towards therole and contribution of all major groups

in society, including corporations


14/23

Implicit CSR and the National BusinessSystems-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 firmOrganization of market

processes

Authoritativecoordination andcontrol systems


15/23

NBS approach as a framework for researchinto implicit CSR

30 years of established research tradition in comparativeresearch in Europe (e.g. Sorge, Maurice, Whitley, Kristensen,Clark, Child, Kieser, Lane)

Conceptualization of divergent models of capitalism in EuropeAnglo-saxon (GB, IRL)

Nordic (SF, S, N, DK)

Rhenish (D, F, CH, A, NL, LUX, B, I, ES, P)

Eastern European (PL, H, CZ, SK, SLO etc.)

Key finding that NBS only change slowly over time if at all

Allows for research into national systems of CSR


16/23

Implicit CSR and European National BusinessSystems

Stronger role of the state in risk sharing and coordination of theeconomy

Relatively minor role of capital markets.

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)


17/23

Explicit CSR andNeo-Institutionalism

Organizational fields as those organizations that, in theaggregate, constitute a recognized area of institutional life: keysuppliers, resource and product consumers, regulatory agencies,and other organizations that produce similar services and

products (DiMaggio and Powell 1983).New, rational organizational practice occurs because it isregarded as legitimate within the organizational field (Meyerand Rowan 1977, Scott 2001).

Neo-Institutionalism explains the global diffusion of managementconcepts and practices beyond national or industry borders(Business Re-engineering, ISO 9000, Lean Management, TQMetc.; Meyer 2000).


18/23

Ligitimacy of managementpractice through ...

Coercive Isomorphismsexternal rules, demands, expectations, norms, laws which haveto be respected to avoid sanctions of loss of trust

Mimetic Processesincreasingly complex technologies, goal ambiguities anduncertainty causes managers to just imitate best practices

Normative Pressuresprofessionalization of the management craft by way of anincrease in formal degrees and global networks, especially in thecontext of professional and ecucational associations and industryassociations.


19/23

Peculiarities of European explicit CSR

Pivotal role of regulating/governmental bodies

Multistakeholder-approach (government, industry associations,trade unions, NGOs)

Corporate involvement in regulatory processes (z.B. Polder-model, self-commitments)

Dominant role of ecological/environmental issues

Philanthropy only of marginal importance

Secular approach


20/23

CONCLUSIONS......Implications of the proposed framework

Descriptive implications: CSR has different contents, meaningsand connotations depending on the institutional and nationalcontext

Instrumental implications: corporate CSR has to be adapted toand contextualized in a specific institutional and nationalenvironment

Normative implications: revisiting the core assumptions of CSRin the Anglo-Saxon debate, which sees CSR (that is: explicitCSR) as an approach to locate social responsibilities ofcorporations which is better and more appropriate thancollective, regulatory solutions to the problem (that is: implicitCSR)


21/23

CSR in worldwide:Back to the research questions

Why was CSR not discussed in Europe before? European companies have ever been socially responsible;

however, they

did not use the label of CSR for this;

practiced CSR as a natural/self-evident response to theinstitutional framework of business.

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 contextswhich institutionalize social responsibility in a different wayfrom their respective home countries;

Changes in the organizational field of companies popularise

CSR as a management idea.


22/23

REFERENCES

Albert, M. 1991. Capitalisme contre capitalisme. Paris: LeSeuil.Bondy, K., D. Matten & J. Moon. 2004. 'The Adoption of VoluntaryCodes of Conduct in MNCs - A Three Countries Comparative Study'Business and Society Review, 109:4, 449-477.

Carroll, A.B. 1999. Corporate social responsibility - evolution of a

definiti-onal construct. Business & Society, 38(3): 268-295.Carroll, A.B., & Buchholtz, A.K. 2002. Business & society : ethics andstakeholder management (5. ed.). Cincinnati, Ohio: South-WesternCollege Pub./Thomson Learning.

Child, J., & Kieser, A. 1979. Organization and managerial roles inBritish and West German companies: An examination of the culture-free thesis. In C.J. Lammers, & D.J. Hickson (ed.), Organizationsalike and unlike: Inter-national and inter-institutional studies in thesociology of organizations: 251-271. London: Routledge.


23/23

Documents

PORTRAYALS OF CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY