Corporate Social Responsibility Theory

Corporate Social Responsibility Theory

The contemporary west corporate economies view the market as a passive institution with corporations considered the active corporations. Presently, many corporation have undergone evolution with their main aim being serving the interests of those controlling at the expense of those not in control (Banerjee, p.55,2008). In most cases, corporate social responsibility entails ways ,which an organization tend to exceed their minimum obligations in relation to specified stakeholders by regulation coupled with corporate governance. There is a need for development of a corporate social responsibility that defines it to be a means to voluntarily incorporate social and environmental apprehension to their operations as well as interactions with the stakeholders considered to be above legal responsibilities entities (Debeljak, & Gregorič,p.320,2006). Such a scenario would encourage a compliance culture in relation to all the concerned entities.

The aspect is important in helping entities to achieve a compliance culture with a more limited notion of stakeholders to institute a stronger link. It entails concentrating on stakeholders able to manipulate the financial and competitive position of a company who leave no resources to serve the interests of marginalized stakeholders (Maley, p.2, 2013). Conversely, corporate social responsibility is a product strategy aimed at sustaining a competitive advantage .corporate citizenship concept need to be conducted through engaging with the stakeholders and corporations to help them establish relationships with them.

Business ethics

Business ethics is important in relation to making business decisions, which should not be solely made from a narrow and economical perspective, but from the social as well as ecological concerns taken into consideration. It is significant for any individual in the business world to consider the impacts of their economical decisions on the environment and the society (Reider-Gordon, etal, p.200 2013). Consequently, the interests of other relevant parties and stakeholders need to be recognized and weighed. The notion is contrary to concept that business responsibility is restricted to shareholders interests. Therefore, corporations’ managers need to concentrate on economical factors only when making decisions.

Many business ethics textbooks seem to be mainly concerned with the individual firms’ responsibility and their managers. This means that business ethics only concentrates on the query of how individuals considered business executives and single firms are able to enhance their performance in terms of ethical matters in business life context (Paton & Siegel, p.190, 2005). The approach has, nonetheless, recently been condemned as unsuitable for the present global economical competition setting. It is not sensible to anticipate that social as well as ecological problems can be solved by increase of manager’s social responsibility.

Many managers tend to acknowledge their responsibility, which makes the problem to be the global economical system, as it becomes challenging them to act on their thoughts (Mattera, p.35, 2010). The systems works in a approach, which forces corporations, and societies that desire to attain corporations and employment forced to contend with low salaries, safety regulations and environmental protection standards and taxation. Such a system, is very difficult and impossible to benefit all the stakeholders and the entire society. There is a need for moral acceptability in terms of institutional frameworks linked to the functioning of global economy (Lindgreen & Swaen, p.234, 2010). People need to be concerned about the global economy rules and not the individual moral responsibility of managers. Global business requires global ethics as well as global politics if it is meant to profit all stakeholders and the entire society.List of references

Banerjee, S. (2008). Corporate Social Responsibility: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.Critical Sociology. 34, 51-79.

Debeljak, Z., & Gregorič, A. (2006). Modeling corporate social responsibility.Competitiveness, Social Responsibility and Economic Growth. 313-326.

Duarte, A. P., Mouro, C., & das Neves, J. G. (2010). Corporate social responsibility: Mapping its social meaning. Management Research, 8(2), 101-122. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/1536-541011066461

Lindgreen, A, & Swaen, V 2010, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility’, International Journal of Management Reviews, March, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 19 October 2013.

Maley, Ag 2013, ‘SOCIAL JUSTICE TO WOMEN AND INDIAN LEGAL SYSTEM’, Golden Research Thoughts, 2, 12, pp. 1-3, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 19 October 2013.

Mattera, P 2010, ‘Corporate Social Irresponsibility’, Social Policy, 40, 2, p. 35, MasterFILE Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 19 October 2013.

McWilliams, A, Siegel, D, & Wright, P 2006, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility: Strategic Implications’, Journal Of Management Studies, 43, 1, pp. 1-18, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 19 October 2013.

Paton, D., & Siegel, D. S. (2005). The economics of corporate social responsibility.

Reider-Gordon, M., Funk, T. M., Ewelukwa, U., Feldman, I., & Wagner, C. (2013). Corporate social responsibility. The International Lawyer, 47(4), 183-200. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1398765676?accountid=458