The Meaning and Meaningfulness of Corporate Social Initiatives

In response to pressures to be more “socially responsible,” corporations are becoming more active in global communities through direct involvement in social initiatives. Critics, however, question the sincerity of these activities and argue that firms are simply attempting to stave off stakeholder pressures without providing a corresponding benefit to society. By drawing on institutional theory and resource dependence theory, we consider what factors influence the adoption of a “meaningful” social initiative—an initiative that is sustainable and has the potential for a significant positive impact on society—as opposed to a symbolic initiative. In addition, we raise the question of how social initiatives—both meaningful and symbolic—participate in the “institutional war” over the meaning of corporate social responsibility.     

Corporate Profit,Social Welfare,and the Logic of Capitalism

Business ethics scholars have proposed strategies for mitigating the ill effects brought on by a wealth maximization business strategy by urging managers to either embrace corporate social responsibility (CSR) or to manage according to stakeholder theory. In this article I argue that these strategies are often ineffective in bringing about the behavior they promote because it is antithetical to the nature and logic of capitalism. I examine the organizing principles of capitalism and the role it assigns to capitalists, and juxtapose these with the behavior prescribed by three normative frameworks: strategic management theory (SMT), the CSR initiative, and stakeholder theory. Unlike the behaviors prescribed by the CSR initiative and stakeholder management theory, the behavior prescribed by SMT is consistent with the role of capitalists as defined by the organizing principles of capitalism, and SMT's “rules” have instilled habits that have, in turn, been able to mold managers’ aspirations and purposes. CSR and stakeholder theory must not only combat the habits instilled by the entrenched SMT, they must also find some way of instilling habits that run contrary to those defined by the nature and logic of capitalism itself.     

Wird die Relevanz von Ertragsteuern für die Unternehmensrechnung nach rechtlichen oder ökonomischen Kriterien beurteilt?

Textbooks in the areas of Management Accounting, Finance and Valuation treat taxes very differently. Finance and Valuation increasingly consider tax effects. Management Accounting considers taxes only if they meet certain legal “cost” criteria. These criteria follow tax law rules, but not economic rules and primarily consider tax effects of the local business tax only. This view is also reflected in recent cost accounting regulations. We present evidence from a survey of managers and chambers of commerce, according to which practitioners’ views of whether the local business tax is a cost are heterogeneous. The majority of managers do not consider the local business tax as a cost and do not pass it on to customers. The chambers of commerce however still consider the local business tax as a cost.     

Sustaining the Financial Value of Global CSR: Reconciling Corporate and Stakeholder Interests in a Less Regulated Environment

In this article we examine the association between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and firm value. This line of research is important since firms continue to invest in CSR even though past studies reveal a limited linkage between financial value and CSR. However, the business case for CSR or “doing good while making a profit,” appears to be advancing within the business ethics literature as a preferred conception of CSR. We conjecture that the greater unification and refinement of both profit maximization and stakeholder interests through corporate acts, not statements alone, will sustain the financial value of CSR in a less regulated global business environment. We study the triangle of what companies say, what companies do, and firm financial performance. We analyze Fortune 250 firms and find a positive association between what companies do based on KLD Research and Analytics, Inc. (KLD) ratings, and what companies state about ethics in their CSR statements. We then employ regression analysis and find that companies’ socially responsible acts are positively associated with overall firm value and financial performance. Yet we do not find a statistically significant association between what companies say regarding ethics in their CSR statements and their financial outcomes. These results suggest that firm value and financial performance is associated with what companies do and not what they say. Our results seem to be driven by multinational corporations (MNCs) and not by non‐MNCs. This is possibly because MNCs generally operate in a less regulated global business environment that often necessitates strong ethical corporate leadership to further stakeholder interests. Overall, these results help reconcile corporate and stakeholder objectives since evidence of a link between financial performance and doing good sustains global CSR.     

We Are the Corporation: Dispersive CSR

We contend that the current trend of emphasis on corporate social responsibility (CSR) serves to divert the public's attention from the real ethical issues facing business and society. We extend the scope of social responsibility beyond business corporations to include a range of institutions. We also propose that CSRs be reconceptualized in terms of the ways that managers enable stakeholders to hold themselves and each other responsible for the ways their actions affect each other as they conduct business through the firm. In this article, we propose a new view of corporations and responsibility that reconstrues behavior currently referred to as CSR. Starting with an overview of theories of the firm, we show that the way in which a firm is conceived yields different views on CSR. A shortcoming of the theory of the firm approach to CSR is that it leads us to focus excessively on business corporations at the expense of a broader analysis of other institutional players. These theories also tend to emphasize the obligations of corporations to people rather than of people to each other. We propose that social responsibility be viewed through a systems theory paradigm instead. We then argue that corporations should be construed in terms of the people who impact them. We advance a different conception of business responsibility that is more comprehensive, inclusive, and systemic.     

Financial Returns of Corporate Social Responsibility,and the Moral Freedom and Responsibility of Business Leaders

A number of theorists have proposed mechanisms suggesting that corporate social responsibility produces better financial results. Others subscribe to the theory that, realistically, less ethical means are necessary. This article contains an analysis of these perspectives drawing on observations from evolutionary game theory and nature. Based on these analyses, it is concluded that the financial returns of corporate social responsibility and irresponsibility (CSR and CSI) are equal on average. The explanation is that CSR and CSI aredriven to a state of equilibrium, because if one or the other were to offer higher profits, it would attract more players who would compete for the best opportunities until there was no difference in average profit. Existing empirical research generally shows a positive correlation between CSR as measured and corporate financial performance. It is argued that what is actually causing that finding is probably not CSR but management skill. More skillful managers, whether actually responsible or irresponsible, are able to obtain both higher profits and greater credit in imperfect measures of CSR. Next it is shown that this theory of equal returns implies greater moral freedom and therefore responsibility for business leaders. It is concluded that this insight can intensify the interest of decent business leaders in vigorously championing CSR.     

The Global Food Industry and “Creative Capitalism”: The Partners in Food Solutions Sustainable Business Model

Rising global food prices have driven 44 million additional people into extreme poverty—and malnutrition—in developing countries since June 2010. Partners in Food Solutions (PFS), a nonprofit social enterprise affiliated with General Mills, is proposed as the conduit for food industry managers, engineers, and scientists to initially advise small‐ and medium‐sized African mills and food processors—and later other developing countries—on improving supply chain management by addressing manufacturing problems, developing products, improving packaging, extending product shelf, and finding new product markets. In this article, the “creative capitalism” model of sustainability and social and environmental responsibility is applied to the food manufacturing industry's efforts supporting PFS. Furthermore, the evolution of the sustainable business model developed by PFS is thoroughly described, explained, and analyzed as a generic model of social enterprise to be “scaled up” by the global food manufacturing industry. A summary of salient points conclude the article.     

A Model for Managing Corporate Sustainability

The world is faced with unprecedented global economic, environmental, and social challenges. Sustainable development has emerged as an organizing principle for addressing these issues. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is seen as the business contribution to sustainable development. The article defines CSR as an organization's efforts to secure resources and legitimacy for survival or competitive advantage by managing nonmarket and nonregulated issues arising from complex social and environmental problems. Supporting this definition, the “sustainability issue management” (SIM) model is presented to help managers and researchers assess and manage CSR issues. Based on ecological economics, the tool originated from a larger study. The model is used to explain and discuss how the UK Government's National Indicator 185 (requiring carbon reporting from Local Authorities) shaped the action of a supplier to Local Authorities. The case illustrates how the SIM model can help both managers and researchers understand and manage CSR issues.     

Should Firms Go “Beyond Profits”? Milton Friedman versus Broad CSR1

When attempting to articulate the nature and scope of corporate social responsibility (CSR), a variety of opinions emerge. The primary CSR issue appears to be: Should firms go “beyond profits”? In order to address this normative question, this article will explore the theoretical underpinnings of CSR and its practical application. Part one of the paper begins by discussing common CSR definitions. Part two outlines the CSR debate in terms of the “narrow view” of CSR (as represented by Milton Friedman) versus the “broad view” (i.e., beyond profits). Part three applies both the narrow and broad approaches to CSR in analyzing two classic business and society cases: (1) the Ford Pinto; and (2) Merck's river blindness pill. The article concludes with a proposed synthesis of the CSR approaches discussed.     

Defining social responsibility

Corporate responsibility to society takes many forms and has an infinite number of dimensions. Many of the dimensions are international while others are more relevant to a particular society. This article reviews the development of the social responsibility movement in business and considers those elements most deserving of socially responsible behaviour for examples. In defining corporate responsibility to society, examples have been drawn from the South African environment.     

Corporate Responsibility and Compliance with the Law: A Case Study of Land,Dispossession, and Aftermath at Newmont's Ahafo Project in Ghana1

An important part of responsible business practices is compliance with the law. This article details what actually happens when the laws of the host country fail to ensure adequate protection. The focus here is on land dispossession and loss of livelihood in relation to a gold mine project in central Ghana. How is it that a well‐known international company—Newmont—with its own corporate social responsibility (CSR) statements sets up a project in the year 2003 that displaces subsistence farmers from their land without compensating in cash or with replacement land? The analysis identifies the factors that lead the company to not compensate farmers for their lost land: cost‐cutting, strict adherence to the law, CSR commitment that was new and not internalized, complexities of the Ghanaian land tenure system, peer pressure to preserve the status quo, selection of an “old‐school” CSR manager, and the inadequacy of Ghanaian mining law to account for relatively novel, “open‐pit” mining techniques. However, the specter of famine raised by civil society activism, the involvement of the International Financial Corporation, and a better qualified CSR team constitute another set of factors that lead to a comprehensive package of livelihood improvement measures. There is a contrast between the complexity, long‐term, and advanced type of assistance Newmont currently envisages and the backward, short‐term, formalism, and brutality of denying compensation for land back in 2003. This research is based on the extensive documentation Newmont makes available on its web site, interviews conducted in Ghana, and literature research.     

Insights from a Management Prophet: Mary Parker Follett on Social Entrepreneurship

Current‐day management leaders such as Peter Drucker and Rosabeth Moss Kanter have cited Mary Parker Follett as guru and prophet given her foreknowledge of systems theory, action research and leadership. She viewed business as a social institution and work itself as a community service, concepts particularly relevant in the context of understanding social entrepreneurship. Referencing two of her works, “The Individual in Society” and “Business in Society”, this paper introduces Follett, defines social entrepreneurship and presents her ideas as timely insights on the meaning of work, ethics and the role of business in society.     

中国企业的游说行为及其伦理规范研究

游说是指企业通过各种途径与政府官员进行沟通,力求在政府政策和立法的制定和实施过程中反映本企业的利益和要求。企业的游说行为在本质上不是邪恶的,而是一种对社会负责的行为。文章首先通过理论分析建立了一个企业游说行为的框架,然后通过与十多位企业高层进行深度访谈,探讨了我国企业游说的途径及其潜规则。针对访谈中发现的伦理问题,分析了我国企业游说行为的伦理,提出了解决我国企业游说行为伦理问题的可行步骤。     

The role of business in society

This is one of a series of articles dealing with social and political issues relevant to business. It is intended to present some of the dilemmas which face top management in setting objectives and policies for the business. A number of key issues are isolated, matching economic objectives and social responsibilities, defining the rôle of the huge multi-national company, reconciling the different aims of owners, managers, and employees, etc. Finally the authors pose the problem: how should the modern corporation be controlled to ensure that it operates in the interests of the community at large, as well as the shareholders?     

From primacy to purpose commitment: How emerging profit-with-purpose corporations open new corporate governance avenues

This paper aims at contributing to corporate governance theory by developing a model of governance that takes into account a recent legal innovation: the introduction of purpose-driven legal business forms in the corporate law of several countries. Current debates in such theory oppose models that grant “primacy” (i.e., ultimate control rights) to different constituencies. The resulting uncertainty proves problematic in the face of new, urgent social and environmental stakes that are difficult to represent in traditional governance bodies. Newly adopted profit-with-purpose corporate forms' introduction of a “purpose” in corporate contracts renews these debates. We show that through the “purpose commitment” model it enables, the distribution of control rights in the governance system is decoupled from the objectives assigned to the corporation. This new approach renews the formal role of management, and corporations’ accountability to society. We explore the theoretical, practical, and political consequences of this new model.     

THE TIMING OF LABOR TRANSFERS IN DUAL RESOURCE-CONSTRAINED SYSTEMS: “PUSH” VS. “PULL” RULES*

Altough the dual resource-constrained (DRC) system has been studied, the decision rule used to determine when workers are eligible for transfer largely has been ignored. Some earlier studies examined the impact of this rule [5] [12] [15] but did not include labor-transfer times in their models. Gunther [6] incorporated labour-transfer times into his model, but the model involved only one worker and two machines. No previous study has examined decision rules that initiate labor transfers based on labor needs (“pull” rules). Labor transfers always have been initiated based on lack of need (“push” rules). This study examines three “pull” variations of the “When” labor-assignment decision rule. It compares their performances to the performances of two “push” rules and a comparable machine-limited system. A nonparametric statistical test, Jonckheere's S statistic, is used to test for significance of the rankings of the rules: a robust parametric multiple-comparison statistical test, Tukey's B statistic, is used to test the differences. One “pull” and one “push” decision rule provide similar performances and top the rankings consistently. Decision rules for determining when labor should be transferred from one work area to another are valuable aids for managers. This especially is true for the ever-increasing number of managers operating in organizations that recognize the benefits of a cross-trained work force. Recently there has been much interest in cross-training workers, perhaps because one of the mechanisms used in just-in-time systems to handle unbalanced work loads is to have cross-trained workers who can be shifted as demand dictates [8]. If management is to take full advantage of a cross-trained work force, it need to know when to transfer workers.     

Are we going towards a society of “activity” or “work”?*

Abstract. The aim of the article is to discuss the perspective of a decline in dependent work - which Dahrendorf and Braverman had argued was coming - either due to an emerging society of “activities” or a process of work “degradation”. Why did such a scenario not prove to be realistic? The author shows from which concepts such a downgrading stems and points out the responsibility of approaches that do not see work as a social activity and see technology as a deus ex machina. As a matter of fact, the western world is not experiencing a dissolution but, rather, a persistent (if not growing) importance of work. The author sketches the great technical and organizational transformation in the ongoing production patterns and work schemes in contemporary society. He maintains that these processes, decreasing the homogeneity and increasing the heterogeneity of work, make a society of “works” more likely than one of “activities”.     

A stratified system of knowledge and knowledge icebergs in cross-cultural business models: Synthesising ontological and epistemological views

Because the lack of consensus on defining knowledge, coupled with its associated knowledge iceberg phenomenon, is a key barrier to effectively managing dispersed knowledge in the Internet-driven cross-cultural business model (CBM), we synthesised an ontological and epistemological understanding with the view of existential phenomenology, proposing a “dynamic hierarchical system of knowledge” and three primary knowledge iceberg archetypes as metaphors of cognitive variances in this context. Theoretically, this integrative perspective enriches the philosophical grounds of knowledge by transcending individual subjectivity to achieve a universal understanding of the objectivity of knowledge, thus contributing to the literature at the intersection of international business and knowledge management domains. It also responds to the calls for addressing larger, urgent problems by associating the social phenomena of reality to theoretical development. From a practical standpoint, this research is instrumental in enabling international leaders and managers to identify the cultural impediments to fulfilling their knowledge management objectives in CBMs.     

The Conflict between U.S. Patent Protection and Technological Innovation: Analysis and Problem Solving by Means of the Integrated Causal Model for Innovated Ethic

Criticisms of patent laws for technological innovations in the United States reveal a multifaceted milieu of problems centered around the protection of short‐term economic gain and individual property rights. In this article, we consider this a conflict between current patent laws and the innovation capabilities of organizations. We propose a solution that enables the company to assure its long‐term survival in the face of these restrictions. This presumes that the firm will at least maintain its innovation capacities while preserving the company's ethical values and those of its social environment. We offer a theoretical model that is designed to help managers and policymakers reorient their governance strategies for managing the innovation process, using the “ethics of responsibility,” which establishes the link to individual moral values at the beginning of a governance process as well as the consequences of a decision. Our integrated causal model of ethical innovation for patents is presented and implications for global organizations and possible solutions for patent law process failure are offered.     

O2O模式下考虑消费者参考效应和成员互惠利他的产品——服务供应链微分博弈

成员的互惠利他行为是影响企业决策的重要行为因素,消费者的质量和服务水平参考效应也是影响消费者购买决策的重要行为因素,本文将三者纳入到一个制造商和一个O2O销售模式的零售商构成的产品-服务供应链中,同时考虑运作模式的内在动态性,构建了制造商和零售商间的微分博弈模型。借助贝尔曼连续型动态规划理论,分析了分散、集中、互惠利他三种决策模式下的制造商质量水平策略、零售商服务水平策略以及供应链系统绩效,并对其进行了对比分析。研究表明:相比于分散决策模式,互惠利他行为有助于成员制定更高的质量和服务水平,提高品牌商誉,获得更大效用。数值算例验证了所得结论,并进行了消费者质量和服务水平参考效应、渠道偏好以及成员互惠利他行为对供应链绩效影响的敏感性分析。算例结果表明:1)消费者的参考效应使消费者产生“锚定心理”,导致制造商降低质量水平,零售商降低服务水平,也损害了产品-服务供应链的绩效。消费者的渠道偏好对供应链成员策略和绩效有着重要影响;2)零售商应鼓励消费者进行线上购买产品,并以线下渠道的服务作为销售辅助措施,满足消费者的体验效用;3)成员的互惠利他行为作为一种正向社会偏好能够对分散决策模型下的供应链绩效进行帕累托改进,并且会获得额外的社会福利;4)当且仅当制造商和零售商具有纯利他行为偏好,即具有最低回报程度和最高利他程度时,供应链的总利润能够达到集中决策情形。