This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.
Miles and Munilla (2005) description of the motives involved in corporate social responsibility by using the van Marrewijk (2003) corporate social responsibility framework and Carroll (1991) Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility, which can be seen in Table 1. This table shows how different levels of commitment to corporate social responsibility linked to the motives and results. Framework that describes the philosophy of the company's corporate social responsibility can be, and compliance-driven, driven by profit, driven by care and synergies or totally. In the first phase of the category of corporate social responsibility, which is called the phase law, and companies involved in corporate social responsibility as it is the duty and obligation to follow laws and regulations. Stage of economic and corporate social responsibility of companies to use as a strategy to create competitive advantage and better financial performance. Stage of moral, charitable and in order to be a balance between profit, people and the planet. At this stage the company does not focus only on profit but also on social welfare. (Ibid.)
Many authors argue that companies can get huge benefits by being socially responsible (EDO and Papasolomou, 2007). However, there are a large number of different views of what the companies participating in corporate social responsibility and interest is what is happening in fact, a company involved in corporate social responsibility. Kotler and Lee (2005) says that the companies involved in corporate social responsibility in order to look better, feel better, do better and live longer. They explain that through participation in corporate social responsibility the company will look good in the eyes of potential customers, and co-workers, investors, etc., in the media. In addition, employees, customers, shareholders and board members feel really good. Many analysts also that corporate social responsibility to improve the brand, and some claim that companies with a strong reputation for corporate social responsibility, and will continue for a longer period. Kotler et al. (2005) to describe the companies can get big gains built to participate in corporate social responsibility, and that these benefits are the reasons for their participation in corporate social responsibility. Kramer and Porter (2006) describes the reasons for participating in corporate social responsibility of a moral obligation, sustainability, and a license to operate and reputation.
Moral obligation - and the companies participating in corporate social responsibility because they believe it is their duty to be a good citizen, and "do the right thing."
Sustainability - The company focuses on the environment and nurtured in conjunction with the belief that it is better for the company over the long term. There is a good explanation for that comes from the World Business Council on Sustainability, which explains: "Meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."
License to operate - and many of the companies participating in corporate social responsibility just because they are forced to they need to follow the regulations and permissions from the governments, local communities and other stakeholders to be able to do business.
Reputation - explain many of the companies that use corporate social responsibility to improve the reputation and corporate image, promote the brand, in order to explain the moral that in order to raise the value of the company in the stock market. Kotler et al. (2005) and another view, describe the companies participating in corporate social responsibility for
Gain several benefits, explains what is most important are:
Increase sales and market share - and there is strong evidence that the customers when making decisions to buy the product they consider such factors as the company's participation in the social responsibility of companies,
Activities. Improve the status of the brand - when linked to the company or brand of corporate social responsibility with it affects the brand image and consumers are likely to have a positive feeling toward the image it.Improved and influence - the company may obtain the publications positive on the activities of corporate social responsibility in various reports and business magazines.
Staff to increase the ability to attract, motivate and retain - employees working for companies that participate in the activities of corporate social responsibility, describes the values that they are proud of their company, and it pays them. Lower operating costs - Description of many companies that engage in corporate social responsibility in the outcome
Reduced operating costs and increase revenue. The company can, for example, reduce the costs of marketing campaigns, as it is common that the gains to increase the company free publicity as a result of the clash of corporate social responsibility of their own.
Growing interest of investors and financial analysts - and some believe that the activities of corporate social responsibility can increase shareholder value and it is easy for companies participating in the social responsibility of companies to get access to capital. (Ibid.)
Although many argue that companies can get tremendous benefits from participation in corporate social responsibility and Kramer et al Qaeda. (2006) and demonstrates that it is difficult to determine what are the benefits that you get a company really social responsibility of companies to participate. Continued to describe the analysis of the benefits gained from participating in corporate social responsibility is crucial. Moreover, Kramer and others. They say that the relationship between good business and customer attitudes indirectly so that it is impossible to measure.
However, they are convinced that corporate social responsibility will become more important to the success of competition in the near future.
Moreover, some argue that corporate social responsibility does not affect the company at all, while others think that corporate social responsibility can have a negative impact even on the company (Maguire et al, 1988). The main critic of the corporate social responsibility is that the objective of the challenges traditional companies to maximize profit. Moreover, many analysts is that companies should maximize shareholder wealth and social welfare is not that managers do not have any obligation or right or the expertise to improve the social issues (Clark, Murphy, Gerrans, Kristoffersen, 2005). Chairer, Hansen and Young (2005) even claim that the activities of corporate social responsibility can affect the value of shares adversely affected.
Smith (2007) and believed the opposite, he says, companies are rated high in social responsibility of the participating companies have a better performance than companies rank low in this dimension. Moreover, he argues that through participation in corporate social responsibility of companies can gain a competitive advantage, as well as improved reputation.
Edo et al. (2007 (for example, that describes the stock markets and financial institutions to record companies involved in corporate social responsibility, as well as information about their work. This has increased pressure on companies involved in corporate social responsibility. It has become common also to institutional guidelines investors and demand information about the activities of corporate social responsibility in the company and many investors and stakeholders to take this into consideration when deciding which company to invest their money.
Kramer and others. (2006) and a similar view to describe the increasing pressure for companies to participate in corporate social responsibility, for example, stakeholders, governments, activists, and the media. Moreover, Kramer and others. (2006) claim that people are also starting to hold companies to account for the social implications of their business activities.
Golob and Podnar (2007) and similar views also share describe the essence of corporate social responsibility and the idea that any company that can act without charge or concern to the community. It is therefore important for companies to participate in the social responsibility of companies to meet the community and stakeholders and wants and expectations. He added Smith (2007) show that the demand for companies involved in corporate social responsibility since the concern for the environment, which has grown havestarted companies to participate in corporate social responsibility.
In conclusion, Chairer others. (2005) finds that most companies do not participate in the social responsibility of companies to do the right thing, they do so to create a greater financial value of the company.
The history and development of Corporate Social
Be as corporate social responsibility as a relatively new concept, but can be attributed some of their
Time in history. Chryssides and Kaler (1993) describes how the Catholic Church Romanian,
Especially in the medieval period, and cut a specific law that can be prescribed for what was
Illegal behavior in different areas of the business world. Prevents the law of Moses
Reapers of the harvest of all crops, since they have to leave some for the poor. And the servants of
Entitled to the rest of their day on Saturday, just like their masters. There was to be pardoned
All the fifty years that was the cancellation of all debts, what was called the year of
And published the first books on corporate social responsibility in 1930 with one of the most influential being
"Social responsibilities of the businessman" by Howard. T. Bowen in 1953 (Windell,
2006). It could be argued that the concept of corporate social responsibility in the West and the actual beginning in 1948,
After World War 2, when the United Nations was the Declaration of Human Rights. This
Followed the doctrine of the ILO Declaration on the principles and fundamental rights in
Work in 1972.
In "Making Globalization Good, the ethical challenges of global capitalism", Davis (2003)
Describes how the concept of corporate social responsibility for the first time in 1960 between the internationalization
Companies from the United States and those involved in the former colonial Powers in Africa and Asia.
There were companies in stakeholder dialogues to justify its presence in new markets,
But also in response to the U.S. civil rights movements in the 1960 and 1970s.
There are a number of writers in the last quarter century, admitted that the activities of
Organizations have an impact on the external environment. Researchers have proposed to
Companies should be responsible not only for shareholders but also to other
Stakeholders. These concerns first appeared in the 1970s, and was for example, reported by
Ackerman in 1975, who said the companies were aware of the need to adapt to the new
The social climate of the responsibilities of the community, but this focus on the financial results prevented
Them from social response. The rights of all stakeholders to a large extent been
A relatively new phenomenon (Crowther and Rayman - Bacchus, 2004).
There were also arguments against the concept of corporate social responsibility. Milton Friedman's talk
Against corporate social responsibility in the New York Times in 1970, as quoted him as saying "There is only one
Only one social responsibility of business - to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase profits, as long as within the rules of the game, he says, participate in open competition and free without deception or fraud "(Windell, 2006).).
Movement of corporate social responsibility at the outset the focus was on environmental issues. First United Nations Global
Environment Summit held in Stockholm in 1972. The Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro
The year 1992 witnessed the beginning of the changing course of action when you make the business community
Efforts to contribute to the dialogue on environmental issues, economic and social
The establishment of the Business Council for Sustainable Development of sustainable.
In his speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos in January 1999, the United Nations Kofi Annan and the United Nations
Secretary-General, to challenge the companies and countries to adopt a universally agreed on
Values in the areas of human rights, labor standards and environmental protection. This
Was the beginning of the Global Compact network 21. In July 2000 and the World
The deal got the initiative in Johannesburg. He claims that he makes at the global level
The economic system of three components:
Respect and support, and human rights
ââ‚¬Â¢ Elimination of all forms of forced child labor
ââ‚¬Â¢ In response to environmental challenges.
The European Union is with the corporate social responsibility and corporate social responsibility since the
Considered to contribute positively to the strategic goal decided in Lisbon in 2000: "to become
Economy the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based world, capable of achieving sustainable economic growth and more and better jobs and social cohesion. "There is a green paper on corporate social responsibility developed in order to launch a wide debate on how the European Union to promote social responsibility in each of theEuropean and international level (Green Paper promoting a European framework for corporate social
In 2006.14 of the 25 states of the European claim that they participate actively in
Claimed to promote social responsibility for companies in their countries and governments of the 16 that have
Trade incentives, which was established in the area of corporate social responsibility. In spite of these laws in the area
Corporate social responsibility is not very well developed in Europe, but some efforts have been made. For example,
Organized in Belgium, Germany, Sweden and the United Kingdom at the national level to include pension funds
Social, ethical and environmental concerns and the number of funds with these concerns
54-354 increased in Europe between 1990 and 2004 (Windell, 2006).
between the events mentioned above, there are a number of frameworks, guidelines and code
How the set is going on. To display the diversity of initiatives, some of the major
Initiatives set out in Appendix 1.
When we talk about the development of corporate social responsibility in the West, it is important not to forget
Differences between countries and regions. Can be treated until 1 in Europe
Homogeneous development of the region and respect of business ethics and corporate
In the study of "hidden 'and' a clear corporate social responsibility ': a theoretical framework to understand the corporate social responsibility
In Europe "(Matten and Moon, 2004), the book provides a conceptual framework of corporate social responsibility
To understand the differences, the European corporate social responsibility and corporate social responsibility
The United States. The report attempts to explain why corporate social responsibility agenda, and in the European tradition
Is it so become in the United States, and explained and relatively new
A rapid rise of corporate social responsibility in Europe.
The rights of employees, the subject of the most important one in the United States.
Fair wages, working hours and conditions, and health, redundancy, and protection against unfair
Have guided the policy of corporate social responsibility examples of chapter on major issues.
The authors conclude that companies in the European companies, many lack social responsibility policy
In employment-related issues, as it is set in many cases, these problems
Institutional framework, rules or laws in Europe. Corporate social responsibility and corporate voluntary policy
Europe did not receive the same amount of attention, because these issues are part of a legal framework.
European companies do not seem to work, is to the United States philanthrophy
Company. The explanation is that in Europe, a relatively high level of taxation
Side of caution, as the company's most advanced infrastructure, the result of realization of side
Areas, such as corporate social responsibility, will be the first in the Government's overall responsibility.
Not only in the agenda of corporate social responsibility that derives from the United States. Official academic
The subject of business ethics and to a large extent an American invention, and most of them
Roots and a large part of the tradition in the United States (Matten and Moon, 2004).
Reception of business ethics in Europe fairly young, and became visible only in the
Beginning in 1980. While the authors of this study, "'implicit' and 'corporate social responsibility an explicit': a
Theoretical framework for understanding CSR in Europe ", in an attempt to explore the differences
Between corporate social responsibility in Europe and the social responsibility of companies in the United States, Matten and Crane (2004) in an attempt to explain
Differences in business ethics between the United States and Europe.
For example, in the United States and there is a strong culture of individualism, which means
That individuals are responsible for the moral choices. Is the individual who is usually
Is expected to be responsible for making the correct moral choices. Governments in Europe and
The trade unions main actors in business ethics. Main guidelines for the ethical
Behavior in Europe tend to be set forth in the legal framework. In the United States
Basic guidelines come from the business themselves, companies and similar symbols.
Since the state in the United States, does not take full responsibility for the Zoning
Such as labor rights and issues of payment, these fears become the responsibility of
Individual company. In Europe, in contrast, typically organized in social issues
Framework for business.
The application of CSR
According to Graafland, Eijffinger, Stoffele, Smid and Coldeweijer (2004) corporate social responsibility related to a set of behavioral aspects of the great diversity within the company. Based on previous research, the rule Graafland et al. (2004) was marked by more than 60 concrete aspects of the social responsibility of companies. It is even possible to improve these aspects so far as to take into account even more aspects of the social responsibility of companies. Disclose this in mind diversity thehigh, corporate social responsibility makes it difficult to give a precise definition. Graafland et al. (2004) stresses the importance of identifying how to implement corporate social responsibility in corporate business bydetermining how to choose to determine what corporate social responsibility because it varies greatly between companies. Give examples of the following three originally created by the "Economic and Social Council" and "World Business Council for Sustainable Development" to explain this: (ibid.)
Example 1: Company takes on a clear role in society beyond the basic
Business and beyond what the law requires, which leads to added value for
The company and the community.
This definition was established for companies advice on corporate social responsibility. However, Graafland et al. (2004) says that this definition is very narrow for two main reasons. First, corporate social responsibility are often closely linked to the core business of the company. For example, the oil company to invest in alternative and less polluting gasoline brand that contribute to the welfare of society as a whole. Secondly, talking to the criticism that corporate social responsibility is not the only aspects of concern beyond the law. And should also refer to the seriousness of the company is applying the law. For example, when you prevent fraud and ensure safety. Is it really a company operating in accordance with the intention of the law and not to apply a minimum of explanation? (Ibid.)
Example 2: Corporate social responsibility includes two components.
1 enough focus by the institution's contribution to prosperity in the long run
2 Relationship with stakeholders and society as a whole
This definition was established in response to criticism of the previous definition. The first paragraph to indicate that can be found on the company value creation of the entity. In this case, and create value not only to economic value. Moreover, it refers to the creation of value in threedimensions, and this so-called "triple bottom line of P" and divided into: profit, people and the planet. (Ibid.)
Profit, and the economic dimension. This dimension refers to the creation of value through
Production of goods and services, and by creating job opportunities and sources of
People, and the social dimension. This has many aspects of the effects of human beings, both inside and outside the organization, such as good working relationships, and so the safety
The planet, the environmental dimension. This relates to the dimension of the effects on the natural environment.
Graafland et al. (2004) states that an important aspect of the second example is that it takes its relationship with stakeholders and society as a whole in mind. Definition also refers to the importance of good r elations stakeholders as well as a way open to do business and to prepare for an ongoing dialogue with several interested parties. Furthermore, it distinguishes between the main stakeholders and others. The employees and shareholders of the key stakeholders since they have structural forms of consultation with the directors of the company. Are all the others who have a particular interest in the activities of the company "stakeholders." These can include the following: consumers, suppliers, competitors and government as well as society as a whole. (Ibid.)
Example 3: corporate social responsibility is the continued commitment by business to behave ethically, and
Contribute to economic development while improving the quality of life
Workforce and their families and also from the community as a whole.
It was agreed, for example, the third and that is slightly different from the previous two examples. First, the third example refers to the ethical conduct, is not addressed in the other examples. In comparison with the example are the so-called "three-P" and confront them, and is referred here simply as "the quality of life." Thirdly, for example, three do not emphasize the relationship with stakeholders, which are not, for example Mon